Politics

[Buster Bluth]

The President is to show Americans respect, and it is to be mutual. When Obama shows me a shred of respect, he'll have earned mine.

In the meantime, as his Chicago-style politicking continues and he spends his time working the agendas of unreasonable environmentalists and unions while degrading business owners (and capitalism in general) and his opposition....I will continue to give him the respect he deserves.

 

[Buster Bluth]

What's funny is that many posts seem to say... my guy is not as bad as the other guy. Take your party hats off and realize they're both are awful choices owned by (often the same) special interest groups.

That's malarkey.

I am a registered Democrat and prefer starting off political conversation with "where to you disagree with your party's candidate?" Nobody is perfect, and the chances of a candidate's views lining up perfectly with your own are ~0%. You have to disagree with something, and it's a great way to sneakily get into a real discussion.

When people play Party Politics, you see "my guy is 100% right, your guy is 100% wrong." That simply isn't the case, because I have openly disagreed with Romney on several issues.

His immigration policy, I labeled "childish and idiotic" and I harshly criticized his calling for an increase in American military strength. I think his opinion on social issues (e.g. marijuana, gay marriage, Planned Parenthood) are backwards too.

But I also recognize that his election--and ultimately the government's job--is about providing the optimal environment for business growth and a strengthening of the middle class. I believe that Obama is in the pockets of environmentalists/academia, and their policies are in direct opposition to the middle class. I have stated this concisely and without the f-bombs on this thread, too.

 

[Redbar]

The President is to show Americans respect, and it is to be mutual. When Obama shows me a shred of respect, he'll have earned mine.

In the meantime, as his Chicago-style politicking continues and he spends his time working the agendas of unreasonable environmentalists and unions while degrading business owners (and capitalism in general) and his opposition....I will continue to give him the respect he deserves.

Oh, is that what you tell yourself? I didn't know. So if I am against my president's "policies" it is right and even dutiful to throw profanity laced moniker's on him. Thanks for the lesson in patriotism...next thing we'll be throwing shoes at those who we disagree with.

 

[ACamp1900]

Oh, is that what you tell yourself? I didn't know. So if I am against my president's "policies" it is right and even dutiful to throw profanity laced moniker's on him. Thanks for the lesson in patriotism...next thing we'll be throwing shoes at those who we disagree with.

"next thing"??????

 

[Buster Bluth]

Oh, is that what you tell yourself? I didn't know. So if I am against my president's "policies" it is right and even dutiful to throw profanity laced moniker's on him. Thanks for the lesson in patriotism...next thing we'll be throwing shoes at those who we disagree with.

Well I didn't cast aspersions on the poster, I did on Obama.

Would you be the guy defending foul language thrown at Nero? "Hey now guys, he's the Emperor and deserves some respect!" Probably not.

But at what point do you refrain from defending the captain of the ship? After it hits the ice berg, or perhaps beforehand when you're staring right at it?

Obama, Reid, and especially Pelosi were pretty despicable (in ascending order) when it came to passing the largest tax increase in history. There actions will do serious damage to this country. So while you think the President is about being called "a genuine piece of ****" for his actions...I think people who, via secret meetings and brokering, assemble a few thousand pages of legal jargon that the average American cannot decipher that will dictate their health care--and then go ahead and make Congressmen, the President, and their families exempt from the very plan they crafted for Americans.....yeah, that's worthy of what I called him.

 

[phgreek]

I think Buster has aquited himself well thus far rather you agree or you don't...he didn't come in here with other people's opinions...I don't think anyone could argue the authenticity of his thoughts.

I think everyone gets a little testy when we have these discussions...myself included. I think the thing that sets people off is regurgitation of BS partisan talking points, and intellectually lazy shots like "you watch Fox news".

By all means agree, disagree...but stop being part of the problem, and formulate YOUR OWN THOUGHTS, and bring an authentic criticism...neg repping someone instead of taking them on is like keying their car...its just really chicken sh!t.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Thank you phgreek, and I agree with everything you said. Especially with the neg repping--that's messed up.

I must say, the conversation now is about profanity and not the issues at hand. We have successfully gone off course.

This leads me to believe that Redbar is actually David Axelrod.

 

[95NDAlumNM]

I think Buster has aquited himself well thus far rather you agree or you don't...he didn't come in here with other people's opinions...I don't think anyone could argue the authenticity of his thoughts.

I think everyone gets a little testy when we have these discussions...myself included. I think the thing that sets people off is regurgitation of BS partisan talking points, and intellectually lazy shots like "you watch Fox news".

By all means agree, disagree...but stop being part of the problem, and formulate YOUR OWN THOUGHTS, and bring an authentic criticism...neg repping someone instead of taking them on is like keying their car...its just really chicken sh!t.

Oh please. We have an Internet tough guy here calling out people. This stuff happens all of the time on these threads. Just yesterday I was told to stop listening to oberman (not even sure how to spell since i never listen to him) and other people That I have no idea who they are. I did not get all butt hurt about like poor little buster. There was nothing original that buster said in that post. It was the same old excuses that are always used.

 

[Redbar]

Thank you phgreek, and I agree with everything you said. Especially with the neg repping--that's messed up.

I must say, the conversation now is about profanity and not the issues at hand. We have successfully gone off course.

This leads me to believe that Redbar is actually David Axelrod.

Funny, no I am just another loyal plebeian to Nero, or the fuhrer or whatever Obama is to some, who still believes we can disagree somewhat civilly.

 

[Buster Bluth]

There was nothing original that buster said in that post. It was the same old excuses that are always used.

So go ahead and disprove them.

 

[Rack Em]

You're a towel!

 

[Rhode Irish]

The President is to show Americans respect, and it is to be mutual. When Obama shows me a shred of respect, he'll have earned mine.

In the meantime, as his Chicago-style politicking continues and he spends his time working the agendas of unreasonable environmentalists and unions while degrading business owners (and capitalism in general) and his opposition....I will continue to give him the respect he deserves.

Buster, you seem like an OK guy and I like talking football with you. But it does not ring true when you claim to be a registered democrat and claim to have a viewpoint that is entirely your own and self-constructed, then come with "the President doesn't respect me" this and "Chicago-style" that. You sound like either a campaign staffer or a blind follower - either way you're just regurgitating partisan rhetoric and talking-points.

I don't know what your personal experiences are, but I'm confused about where the idea comes from that he spends all his time "working the agendas of unreasonable environmentalists and unions while degrading business owners (and capitalism in general)." That just doesn't sound like somebody who is being objective, and definitely not like a "registered democrat" who is trying to like the guy. (I'm actually not a registered democrat, believe it or not.)

I can understand the frustration from people. We are definitely at a crossroads, and things aren't great right now. We all need to do our own assessments of what we think caused the problems we are facing and what we think the best solution is. My personal belief is that the the President inherited a situation that was much worse than most people recognize, and that his administration worked a miracle in order to stave off a much worse fate for us. I think we are moving in the right direction, although I recognize we have a long way to go. My opinion is that a vote for Romney is a vote to return to the environment that led us to this mess in the first place.

As far as negative campaigning and lying and smearing, I think it is disingenuous for either side to be complaining about that. They are both doing their fair share - who you think is worse probably has a lot to do with which horse you're backing. It is to be expected, unfortunately. This is the new politics, until people demand better.

 

[95NDAlumNM]

So go ahead and disprove them.

Please it is very clear that no one listens to anyone else's views on these threads if they do not jive with their own. People can quote from the cbo, mention articles and there is always one reason or another why it is ****ing **** (as someone said). Everyone is so gung ho on proving it and backing it up when there a lot of ways to prove any point you want to make. There is no clear cut right or wrong on any of this yet so many people act like there is and the only way is there way. As you grow older and experience life you will come to find out that life just does not work that way.

 

[Bluto]

Here's another analysis of spending under each president by politifact. Looks like Obama still ranks among the lowest as far as spending under any US President since WW2 and the Romney claims of spending under his administration being out of control are way off. Anyhow, doesn't Congress you know "control the purse strings"?

PolitiFact | Viral Facebook post says Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president

Since we are on the subject of failed policies how come so many people still support laise-faire and or neoliberal as well as trickle down economic policies? All have proved to be spectacular failures.

 

[Bluto]

Please it is very clear that no one listens to anyone else's views on these threads if they do not jive with their own. People can quote from the cbo, mention articles and there is always one reason or another why it is ****ing **** (as someone said). Everyone is so gung ho on proving it and backing it up when there a lot of ways to prove any point you want to make. There is no clear cut right or wrong on any of this yet so many people act like there is and the only way is there way. As you grow older and experience life you will come to find out that life just does not work that way.

That's not entirely true. I agreed with RDU Irish once. Haha.

 

[chubler]

I really think we're getting to complicated here:

if you like raising taxes to generate more income to pay off the debt and are willing to risk economic collapse by overtaxation, as well as the danger that we can't raise taxes indefinitely as entitlement spending balloons, vote for the President.

if you like slashing entitlement spending to pay off the debt and are willing to risk economic collapse by removing a huge chunk of cash from the healthcare market, as well as the moral thicket of taking away basic services from the poor, vote for Romney.

alternatively, you can vote for someone who has good ideas and is fairly civil and polite, but has no chance of winning.

 

[phgreek]

Oh please. We have an Internet tough guy here calling out people.

I'm the internet tough guy...oh brother. I didn't really note who did what...just that Buster indicated he was neg repped. If you didn't engage in the argument...and you neg repped him...yea, it is chickensh!t. Even if you had, I think its BS to neg rep him on politics...thats my opinion...So?

This stuff happens all of the time on these threads.

what stuff??? I have engaged in controversial conversations before...totally disagreed with people, and never neg repped anyone for a conversation like this...nor have I gotten a neg rep from them, nor would I drive-by neg rep someone, nor have I ever received a drive-by neg rep...I guess I don't know the "real" IE then?

Just yesterday I was told to stop listening to oberman (not even sure how to spell since i never listen to him) and other people That I have no idea who they are.

I think that kind of thing is a garbage attack...name in quotes really doesn't matter....so "fox news", "Oberman"...all the same to me. Its not cool.

I did not get all butt hurt about like poor little buster.

That shows some perspective...but it seems like since you brought the Fox crap to buster, youmight be experiencing a little latent butt hurt???

There was nothing original that buster said in that post. It was the same old excuses that are always used.

Realistically, there isn't much necessarily original to say at this point, but I believe his views authentic, and his own...I've seen some of the things he's posted before...he seems to be who he claims to be from my memory...I certainly wouldn't say he was an Operative sent to IE to subvert the Democrat party.

I think I've been anything but an internet tough guy on here...I've never unloaded on anyone because of their politics or beliefs...I have expressed an opinion, argued, and went about my business. Yea, a few times, when I thought someone was out of line...never attacked them, just their behavior. I will concede I should probably let the mods do their job...and stay out of it...If that was your point...totally understand.

 

[mgriff]

Delete my above post, it's corrupted or something. I love this guy, and desperately want to cut through all the partisan bullshit in this thread that is a ****ing plague upon the country.

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/WKJaVJpJ-FI" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CyIXuce36gM" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-ce8GOOMYL8" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

 

[IrishMoore1]

mgriff, nice post. Reps.

Does Buster have a rebuttal to this reality check?! The cold hard facts are the cold hard facts.

 

[jason_h537]

Is Donald Duck going to be on the ballot again this time around???.... wait,,.... nevermind, I forgot, he's not ON the ballot, he just VOTES on it... like 40,000 times... all for Obama... in swing states.

I love you ACamp. There has been 350 cases of voter fraud in this country the past 10 years. Thats 35 a year nationwide Good thing PA, OH, and FL, are spending all those tax dollars to enforce voter fraud laws. Its an epidemic. But it's OK because these laws ensure that Mitt Romney will win PA. Just ask PA Rep. Mike Turzai.

 

[jason_h537]

This is directed directly at Buster because I do not feel like quoting all of his posts.

Obama has had three years of incompetency and childish bickering in congress. He is tied to tax cuts that add to the deficit, two wars that he can not completely cut free from and has to deal with the worst drought the US has faced since the dust bowl. To use your football analogy. That is like inheriting a 1 win team that has traded away all of it's draft picks and has no room on the salary cap, then turned it into a .500 club in 3 years. I understand we all expected miracles when he was sworn in but this is the real world.

As much as you want to dismiss it there has been improvement. For example consumer spending is up, the housing market has started to turn around, and even though the jobs reports numbers are not as good as they were in the first quarter, they are still pointing up. Yes it needs to grow substantially but the entire world is struggling. I am curious what shape did you expect the country to be in right now to call him a complete failure.

You are right the CBO is not an oracle but the wars were expected to be paid for by the continued economic growth the US saw under Clinton, once Bush introduced his tax cuts, that went out the window. As for "Obamacare" We could have had a better system in place but in congress you have to compromise to get things passed. The president does not make laws, he only signs them. Congress legislates. "The largest tax increase of our generation" is a complete lie. You are not tied to any government plan, you pick any plan you want from the private sector. All it does is allows low income earners to a government plan if they choose to.

To another thing you brought up, when did science, teachers, and unions become public enemy #1? The people that teach your children, make the computers you are using to disagree with me, and ensure you are not taken advantage of by your employers. Yes Unions have huge problems as well, but they are not villains. We keep protecting the "job creators" who keep getting more and more from congress, yet, they create no jobs. Did you know that if we rehire all the cops, firefighters, and teachers that have lost there jobs due to cuts passed by congress, unemployment would be at 6%.

Obama is hardly the greatest president and he made promises that he did not keep, but he is far from a failure. Considering all the BS, bickering, and just awful global conditions you have to have blinders on to not give the man some credit. I'm not saying vote for him but maybe your dislike of him is drastically distorting your view.

 

[Domina Nostra]

Obama has had three years of incompetency and childish bickering in congress. .

Isn't the idea that you are either an effective leader or not? If you have such great, convincing, mainstream ideas, isn't part of the job as president getting them accomplished? Clinton took a lot of Republican-compatible ideas, made them his own, and has lived in glory every since. If not, if no one could get anything done in this climate, why is it important that the President get reelected? I am very confident that any number of us could be ineffective Presidents... So give another guy a chance!

I will say that from my perspective the President often says he is pushing an agenda that is beyond politics, but it really is not. For example, the "kill coal" initiative. Its sold as energy independence and cleaner environment, but, really its just the latter since their is no current way to replace coal in our current system (at this point in time) without massive cost hikes and subsidization of inefficient alternatives (although natural gas is changing this picture, but the Administration is against that as well- tracking). You can say all your ideas are bipartisan all day, but that doesn't make it true.

 

[Grahambo]

Politics 101: Blame the other guy to mask your own deficiencies.

It's not what I can do for you or make things better, its what he can't or isn't doing. Like 1st graders tattling.

Congress has a 10% approval rating, lowest in 32 years. (According to WTOP radio in DC)

Come together, not divide and conquer.

 

[Cackalacky]

Politics 101: Blame the other guy to mask your own deficiencies.

It's not what I can do for you or make things better, its what he can't or isn't doing. Like 1st graders tattling.

Congress has a 10% approval rating, lowest in 32 years. (According to WTOP radio in DC)

Come together, not divide and conquer.

Congress needs to be scrapped. I don't think its the people so much as the system. Stop the monetary contributions, and start over. If something worked right only 10% of the time, I bet it would be identified, repaired and/or replaced. I thik its that time with Congress.

 

[Cackalacky]

I love you ACamp. There has been 350 cases of voter fraud in this country the past 10 years. Thats 35 a year nationwide Good thing PA, OH, and FL, are spending all those tax dollars to enforce voter fraud laws. Its an epidemic. But it's OK because these laws ensure that Mitt Romney will win PA. Just ask PA Rep. Mike Turzai.

Not so fast my friend, right now Obama is up in PA by 6 pts and 11 points in FL.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I received my first neg rep from this thread: "stop watching fox news."

How eloquent. When you can't discuss, accuse them of watching Fox News (which I don't, and I despise Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh....got any more stereotypes you'd like to get out of the way, 95NDalumNM?).

That is okay. I have now received two negative reps. Both from the same poster. The first one is because he didn't even understand my post. The second one was in retaliation for neg rep that I just gave that poster for a post that started, "Moronic ....", with no qualification whatsoever.

So don't feel bad. And as point of fact Buster, you know you get my love all the time, what you said about Jason's figures was emotionally biased and wrong. It is actually worse than what Jason said because not just was Obama's first year, but many of the programs from the Bush administration continued as required in year two and even three. That doesn't include being free to return taxes to their previous levels for millionaires, which was done under the Bush Administration and has added to the deficit under the Obama Administration.

Remember the three highest spending administrations ever adjusted for inflation were 1)Bush II, 2)Regan, 3)FDR.*

* Unlike 1 and 2, number 3 in order had a depression and a World War to deal with.

 

[Cackalacky]

I think people forget that what one preseident/congress does is not only for their term in office, it lasts well past their terms. With a surplus in hand, the Bush tax cuts single handedly removed trillons of dollars of projected income which numerous programs were expecting to recieve money... and people are now surprised there have to be cuts.... Are we not smarter than that?

Good piece from the Guardian.

This chart here, from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, shows the impact that the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts – inspired by dynamic scoring – have had on the medium-term US budget deficit, currently stretching to over $1 trillion annually.

In spite of repeated predictions that the Bush tax cuts would spur economic growth, the reality is that they didn't. This hasn't stopped Republican economic orthodoxy demanding further, unfunded tax cuts at every opportunity since, including in the current presidential campaign. In the face of accumulated evidence over the last decade that dynamic scoring doesn't work in practice, it continues to be promoted on the basis that the modelling proves otherwise.

George Osborne will doubtless dispute suggestion that dynamic scoring will undermine public finances as it has in the US. It is certainly possible to adopt a version of the idea that doesn't make monumentally optimistic assumptions that even sympathetic economists can't support. Proponents of dynamic scoring in the US now argue that the "science" of it has come on significantly since its disastrous failure to predict the impact of the Bush tax cuts.

In the UK, however, repeated undershoots in the government's growth projections show that even the economic models that we are familiar with provide a flawed basis for policy.

Dynamic scoring, with a series of new assumptions to justify Conservative faith in tax cuts as the answer to everything, will not lead to a sudden influx of new revenue to the Treasury. If anything, evidence from the US shows the opposite. What it will do is give Osborne a new ideological rationale to cut taxes, possibly before a general election in 2015.

The optimistic assumption of the coalition when it took office was that after the deficit was reduced, there would be room for a pre-election, giveaway budget in 2014; that tax cuts would help to wash away the legacy of spending cuts.

This plainly isn't going according to plan, and Osborne now acknowledges that there may not be enough money for tax cuts in 2014. With Plan A increasingly in ruins, and the Tories slipping back in the polls, keep an eye on mentions of "dynamic scoring" by Osborne in the coming months. It could very easily be the justification for a pre-election tax giveaway and, more damagingly, the introduction into British politics of a new Conservative myth about the value of tax cuts that threatens to distort public policy and damage the nation's finances for a generation to come

 

[JughedJones]

So weird that I love a team and a fanbase that is so insanely conservative on most issues.

I love Catholics, but I don't believe in God.

I don't think there's a super hero, but I believe in you guys.

Catholics brought me my best education and I love them for it. I had a rough go, but Notre Dame brought me back.

I played football and imagined I'd be Rocket or Rice, there is totally a middle ground.

I say a Hail Mary every now and then.


Some of us liberal/non-believers are totally on your side.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Congress needs to be scrapped. I don't think its the people so much as the system. Stop the monetary contributions, and start over. If something worked right only 10% of the time, I bet it would be identified, repaired and/or replaced. I thik its that time with Congress.

Dude all you have to do is cut off the money, and require public financing. Eliminate all PAC's.

If you want to know how it would work, look at Rush Limbaugh. Everyone thought he was so powerful. Then he went rogue nuclear. Now he is radio active. Several large radio station chains that were his bread and butter are in the process of deciding whether to ditch him or not. They consider keeping him a 6 to 12 month payoff. (Coincidently the payoff is quicker if Obama wins.) Rush is only hanging on by the good graces of the media power elite. His demographic average something like a sixty-seven to seventy year old average viewership! In the 80's and 90's he commanded large audiences and was vocally at the front end of the Republican revolution. Today he is down the tubes. Why. He angered enough people that attacked the money he was getting. Has nothing to do with popularity.

 

[Cackalacky]

Dude all you have to do is cut off the money, and require public financing. Eliminate all PAC's.

If you want to know how it would work, look at Rush Limbaugh. Everyone thought he was so powerful. Then he went rogue nuclear. Now he is radio active. Several large radio station chains that were his bread and butter are in the process of deciding whether to ditch him or not. They consider keeping him a 6 to 12 month payoff. (Coincidently the payoff is quicker if Obama wins.) Rush is only hanging on by the good graces of the media power elite. His demographic average something like a sixty-seven to seventy year old average viewership! In the 80's and 90's he commanded large audiences and was vocally at the front end of the Republican revolution. Today he is down the tubes. Why. He angered enough people that attacked the money he was getting. Has nothing to do with popularity.

I agree. 100% and that was what I was getting at in my earlier post.