Politics

[ND NYC]

keeping with the founding fathers thems:

"we will all hang together...or we will hang separately"

ask yourself: which of the parties is doing what it can to bring reasonable people together to solve our nations problems?

 

[autry_denson]

I feel like I'm talking to Keith Olbermann...you're making this harder than it has to be.

1) Get the EPA (and other wasteful, mindless regulatory depts) out of the way so businesses can grow.

2) I understand why unions were formed many years ago, but if you want to deny the lavish pensions and union dues channeling directly to Democratic campaigns, you're denying reality. Look at the state of Wisconsin: public employees make more than private employees!

3) Obamacare is a nightmare, nightmare for health, for finance, for sustainability. New report came out yesterday that 55% of doctors want to repeal it and almost half of Americans want it repealed. That's why Romney says he will, and should. It sucks and costs will oly go up and quality will go down. Everyone has "access." Women have "access" to birth control, too. Bottom line is YOU pay for it, not others.

4) I'm cautiously optimistic that voters will see this fraud for who he is. This "fundamental transformation" of America sucks and will get worse.

What worries me more than the content of what you write is how certain you are that you are 100% right about all of these issues. Considering that there are a number of smart people who disagree with your views entirely, wouldn't you take a minute to pause and consider that you may not have all of the knowledge and insight to solve every major social problem? Wouldn't you want to temper your language in case there are specific points that you might have slightly wrong?

This applies to everyone, but when I read your posts I'm just astounded by how certain you are of yourself. You might think that this is a good quality in someone - in evaluating ideas, it's really not. The issues that are being discussed are extremely complex, and in many cases we don't have great evidence to know who's right and who's wrong. Managing the macro economy is enormously difficult, the number of variables is almost limitless and there are no core principles that have proven successful in all places at all times; climate change is uncharted territory; the new health care system is a program that individuals and businesses and medical providers are just starting to understand and get used to - the best minds in the country have completely different ideas about how these issues are going to play out. Maybe you should open your mind to the possibility that if they don't have it all figured out, you probably don't either.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

What worries me...is how certain you are that you are 100% right about all of these issues...You might think that this is a good quality in someone - in evaluating ideas, it's really not...

How can you be 100% certain that his 100% certainty is bad?

 

[Buster Bluth]

Buster, clearly there is a difference between fearing the other side is going to break out the socialism they've been keeping secret their whole lives and fearing that the other side is going to do exactly what they have been doing at the state level when they've had majorities (codifying bigotry against homosexuals in the constitution, restricting women's rights by effectively banning certain basic health services, restricting access to the polls) and what they have openly campaigned on (shuttering the EPA and the Dept of Education, repealing health reform, extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, shortsighted and wrongheaded energy policy, etc., etc.). I don't think anyone disputes that those are the things that the Republicans hope to accomplish during a Romney administration, whereas the Democrats would certainly dispute the idea that they hope to turn the country socialist during the next four years.

The bolded parts contradict each other.

 

[RDU Irish]

keeping with the founding fathers thems:

"we will all hang together...or we will hang separately"

ask yourself: which of the parties is doing what it can to bring reasonable people together to solve our nations problems?

That answer would be - NEITHER.

 

[GoIrish41]

I feel like I'm talking to Keith Olbermann...you're making this harder than it has to be.

1) Get the EPA (and other wasteful, mindless regulatory depts) out of the way so businesses can grow.

yeah, f**k the environment. My kids can get used to breathing dirty air and drinking filthy water so long as someone who is exploiting them later can turn a tidy profit. When you measure everything in dollars and cents, it is easy to make crazy decisions like this. But, there are a lot of people in this country who care more about their families, their friends, their home towns, the environment, the future and one another than they do about maximizing profits.


2) I understand why unions were formed many years ago, but if you want to deny the lavish pensions and union dues channeling directly to Democratic campaigns, you're denying reality. Look at the state of Wisconsin: public employees make more than private employees!

I don't deny that unions give money to the Dems. (Perhaps you should ask yourself why they do this.) I also know that fewer than 20 people this election cycle have donated more to the republican candidates than all union contributions combined. Why do you think they are willing to spend that kind of money to elect Romney?

3) Obamacare is a nightmare, nightmare for health, for finance, for sustainability. New report came out yesterday that 55% of doctors want to repeal it and almost half of Americans want it repealed. That's why Romney says he will, and should. It sucks and costs will oly go up and quality will go down. Everyone has "access." Women have "access" to birth control, too. Bottom line is YOU pay for it, not others.

You are right, the old system was much better ... great medical care, affordable, and cost increases were completely under control. What was Obama thinking? You know what, if it means that 30 million more people have access to health care, I'm willing to pay for it. That's just the kind of person I was raised to be. That said, why don't we give it a few years to see if all those terrible things you mention happen before we scrap it for a system with a proven track record of sucking? If Obamacare fails, I'll join you in renouncing it.

4) I'm cautiously optimistic that voters will see this fraud for who he is. This "fundamental transformation" of America sucks and will get worse.

You might want to prepare yourself for heartache. There is no way that Romney will EVER be president. It may be one of the few things this elitist pig cannot buy with all of the money he got by ruining the lives of workers to enrich himelf.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Bold Prediction:

No matter what is said in the debate tonight, the Romney supporters will say he won, and the Obama supports will say the opposite.

And there will be no way of proving either side right or wrong.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

1) I'm not running for public office and am not a public figure, so I'm comfortablke with my tone on an internet forum.

2) I'm never sold on smart. Gardner's theory explained 7 different multiple intelligences. (Obama can be a law prof, but I would not hand him a hot dog stand to run on his own) and (Romeny is a former CEO and governor but I wouldn't hire him to construct a building). I respect everyone's opinions but will not hesitaste to point out factual inaccuracies and passionaltely defend my own stances.

3. I never claimed to have all the answers to all the problems. But I'll use history, economics, and reasoning to come to my own conclusions/ opinions.

 

[Buster Bluth]

You think polls are taken on "each of the individual items" of Obamacare? Oh God..

Yes. Here is a report on just such a poll of Republicans. Poll: Republicans hate ‘Obamacare,’ but like most of what it does

1) It's a 906-page law (right?). That's probably not all of the "individual items."

2) That is exactly what I said earlier. People are supportive of the common-sense reform, but hate how they did it. Duh. Again, it's a perfect example of the government doing "good" but not doing it well.

 

[Buster Bluth]

You might want to prepare yourself for heartache. There is no way that Romney will EVER be president. It may be one of the few things this elitist pig cannot buy with all of the money he got by ruining the lives of workers to enrich himelf.

 

[autry_denson]

1) I respect everyone's opinions but will not hesitaste to point out factual inaccuracies and passionaltely defend my own stances.

3. I never claimed to have all the answers to all the problems.

Virtually everything you've written belies these two statements. There's no respect or humility or thoughtful engagement in your posts. It would make me think more highly of you if I saw any signs of it - but even if that's completely unimportant to you, it would help generate a more useful dialogue on the site.

 

[Rhode Irish]

The bolded parts contradict each other.

Buster, we're going around in circles here. We agree that the President is not the King and cannot just make his ideas the law. He has to work with Congress. A republican controlled congress will carry out the will of the base, whether Romney likes it or not. And he will not veto the socially regressive bills that will come out of the republican-controlled congress, but Obama would.

 

[RDU Irish]

GoIrish -

1) Go hug a tree, but stay away from my ticket oak.

2) there is a reason unions are dominant in the public sector and facing extinction in the private sector. It is based in economics and economics have to be tortured to near death before the public sector faces reality.

3) Obamacare does not change ACCESS to healthcare, no one was denied before and all of the same people will declare medical bankruptcies going forward as they are today. If anything, it takes funds from Medicare to fund more Medicaid (take from old to give to younger but poor).

I argue people have even less incentive to take any care of themselves since they have been given the (false) impression that government will take care of their healthcare. So preventative care moves in the wrong direction (rather doctors will provide more "preventative care" because more people will make poor health choices).

4) you remind me of why I stepped away from this thread for a few weeks. Hateful partisan bickering is tiresome whether it is Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Buster, we're going around in circles here. We agree that the President is not the King and cannot just make his ideas the law. He has to work with Congress. A republican controlled congress will carry out the will of the base, whether Romney likes it or not. And he will not veto the socially regressive bills that will come out of the republican-controlled congress, but Obama would.

I think you are wildly overstating the bass. They'd need blue state Republicans to go along with it. We didn't see that sorta stuff under Bush, did we? I for one would staunchly oppose most of that, as would 90% of my Republican friends.

Simply put, a lot would need to happen and so I discredit any of those fears. Romney's time on the state level showed that he could give a **** about social issues being "left."

 

[RDU Irish]

Buster, we're going around in circles here. We agree that the President is not the King and cannot just make his ideas the law. He has to work with Congress. A republican controlled congress will carry out the will of the base, whether Romney likes it or not. And he will not veto the socially regressive bills that will come out of the republican-controlled congress, but Obama would.

Those bills also have to get through the Senate before they see the Oval Office. Neither side will be able to drive partisan reform to the degree Obama was able to do in his first two years. Even if Republicans eek out a majority in the Senate, it is so slim that the bogey man you offer is next to impossible to pass. Republicans are not nearly as united behind the bible banging issues as you imply, besides not being the bigots you wish them to be.

I see this as a good thing. Right wing social engineering is no better than left wing social engineering.

And ditto what Buster said. Romney is socially moderate and only panders to the social extremes.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Go Irish,

You sound like a bitter, angry individual intent on sticking it to "the man" and that's what liberalism will do for American "workers." By the way, if you have a job, you're a worker, no matter which tax bracket you're in.

* We all want clean air and water. Describing Republicans as ones who want children to suffer under anything worse is sad on your part.

* Unions bankrupt local and state treasuries. Fact.

* No good or service that the government controls makes costs go down. It's a logistics and financial $hitshow that won't make "access", "quality" or "cost" any better.

* Every poll has these two neck and neck and you claim Romney will NEVER be president? Haha...give me a break. All I can gaurantee is it will be close.

 

[jason_h537]

OK this thread is getting stupid now. The reason Polish and Buster get so much crap is because they keep spewing nonsense. "Worst President Ever", "Socialist", "Apologist", blah blah blah. We get it you hate Obama because you think he is a freedom killing, business killing, terrorist harboring, radical who wants to kill the American dream from the inside out.

I am pretty sure Irish Houstonian is voting Romney, but I tend to ignore him because he gives real reasons why he is voting Romney. He may agree with you, but he has the sense to say that he is not voting for Obama and these are actual reasons why.

Guess what 4 years from now, regardless of who wins. The USA will still be standing. Still free, still democratic. 4 years since the last election, Obama didn't take your guns away or turn whites into slaves. He didn't give amnesty to all immigrants. He didn't socialize medicine.

You can agree or disagree with me but I have legitimate reasons for not voting Romney and why I am voting Obama. Not just conspiracy theories and outright hated for the man.

This thread is just turning into name calling now and I am partly to blame as well. But we can keep **** talking until this thread is shut down or we can talk about the election.

 

[Buster Bluth]

OK this thread is getting stupid now. The reason Polish and Buster get so much crap is because they keep spewing nonsense. "Worst President Ever", "Socialist", "Apologist", blah blah blah. We get it you hate Obama because you think he is a freedom killing, business killing, terrorist harboring, radical who wants to kill the American dream from the inside out.

I've said that?

 

[IrishLax]

Because my vote doesn't matter (see: voter's paradox)... I'v decided I'm going to vote based on which presidential party has the most race wins for the Nats. Stay tuned.

EDIT: George Washington - Independent - 154 wins; Thomas Jefferson - Democratic-Republican (the **** do I do with this?) - 155 wins; Abraham Lincoln - Republican - 214 wins; Teddy Roosevelt - Republican - 1 win;

So Republicans trounce Democrats... proving Democrats are certifiable losers... WOO ROMNEY 2012!!!!

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Because my vote doesn't matter (see: voter's paradox)... I'v decided I'm going to vote based on which presidential party has the most race wins for the Nats. Stay tuned.

There used to be an old stat about how, when the Redskins win the game before election day, the incumbant has won the last 15/18 times or something like that.

 

[ND NYC]

Because my vote doesn't matter (see: voter's paradox)... I'v decided I'm going to vote based on which presidential party has the most race wins for the Nats. Stay tuned.

didnt Fidel Castro play for the Washington Nationals? you commie bastid!

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

Getting close to the debate. I can't wait!

 

[DSully1995]

Ish gettin reaaaaaaal

 

[Rhode Irish]

Romney is doing a great job in the debate so far (other than that weird romance-with-the-President comment), as expected, but he is also just making stuff up for the purpose of using it in the debate. I don't think much of what he is saying will survive a news cycle and a little fact-checking.

I also think the President is doing a great job. Not much space between the two in terms of scoring the debate.

 

[DSully1995]

Romney is doing a great job in the debate so far (other than that weird romance-with-the-President comment), as expected, but he is also just making stuff up for the purpose of using it in the debate. I don't think much of what he is saying will survive a news cycle and a little fact-checking.

I also think the President is doing a great job. Not much space between the two in terms of scoring the debate.

Yup just saw some politifact ratings, favourable for O on the truth mostly

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Yup just saw some politifact ratings, favourable for O on the truth mostly

Politifact is doing real time references to their previous ratings. It's pretty cool.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Maybe I'm crazy, and I might be, but Romney seems to be destroying Obama...

Granted, I missed 8:50-9:30.

 

[woolybug25]

Maybe I'm crazy, and I might be, but Romney seems to be destroying Obama...

Granted, I missed 8:50-9:30.

It's you Buster....

 

[Ironman8]

Maybe I'm crazy, and I might be, but Romney seems to be destroying Obama...

Granted, I missed 8:50-9:30.

I don't think he is destroying him, but I do think he is the "winner" in my eyes.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I don't think he is destroying him, but I do think he is the "winner" in my eyes.

I think Romney started strong but Obama bested him in the middle. I'd call it a push. Not a game changer either way.

I also think this one was in Romney's wheel house. Domestic issues and the economy are the weak spot for the incumbent.