Politics

[Buster Bluth]

Loved (probably because I agree) Ron Paul's comments today:

"There is essentially no difference between one administration and another, no matter what the platform."

Different shades of gray, I would agree. There are plenty of differences. Not exactly visible on the foreign policy side, but in the budget I think you'd see stark ones.

 

[DSully1995]

Different shades of gray, I would agree. There are plenty of differences. Not exactly visible on the foreign policy side, but in the budget I think you'd see stark ones.

Agree, Social issues/What to spend budget money on is very different between the two

 

[Buster Bluth]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

 

[RallySonsOfND]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

I like him. Would vote for him over Romney (mostly because he is more of a Libertarian, and I'm starting to sway that way).

 

[Buster Bluth]

Particularly these videos:

1) Predicting, in detail, the housing bubble in 2002:

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KONpt9a6HrI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

2) Basically predicting that pissed-off Muslims would strike back at us, i.e. Sept 11, in 1998:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4hJTisovvjc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Buster Bluth]

I would expect Rhode Irish to detest Paul. He seems like a big time Keynesian.

 

[DSully1995]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

Love him. #1 Political inspiration

 

[RallySonsOfND]

I would expect Rhode Irish to detest Paul. He seems like a big time Keynesian.

No wonder He and I don't get along.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/d0nERTFo-Sk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[enrico514]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

What I like about him is the fact that he is one of the rare politician telling people to WTFU and not promoting the status quo !

 

[Rhode Irish]

I would expect Rhode Irish to detest Paul. He seems like a big time Keynesian.

A lot of my friends like him. I think he's kind of a quack, although I do like people generally with non-mainstream ideas. On everything that is non-economic, I'm pretty libertarian. My biggest problem with him is the prick of a kid he raised.

 

[DSully1995]

A lot of my friends like him. I think he's kind of a quack, although I do like people generally with non-mainstream ideas. On everything that is non-economic, I'm pretty libertarian. My biggest problem with him is the prick of a kid he raised.

Go on....?

 

[Bluto]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

He's a carrier politician in the federal governement. Kind of ironic considering his rhetoric. The racial pandering he did in the 80's and 90's was quite pathetic.

Anyhow, I give what most people in this country refer to as "libertarianism" a big time fail considering every nation opprerating under the principals said liberatarians say they aspire to (weak central governement, no taxes ect.) is a complete mess. Also it seems most liberatarians are also neoliberals it that they attempt to completely disassociate economics from social theories, realities and constructs.

It would be interesting to hear Paul describe what school of liberatarian thought he suscribes to.

 

[Buster Bluth]

He's a carrier politician in the federal governement. Kind of ironic considering his rhetoric. The racial pandering he did in the 80's and 90's was quite pathetic.

Anyhow, I give what most people in this country refer to as "libertarianism" a big time fail considering every nation opprerating under the principals said liberatarians say they aspire to (weak central governement, no taxes ect.) is a complete mess. Also it seems most liberatarians are also neoliberals it that they attempt to completely disassociate economics from social theories, realities and constructs.

It would be interesting to hear Paul describe what school of liberatarian thought he suscribes to.

 

[Buster Bluth]

On everything that is non-economic, I'm pretty libertarian. My biggest problem with him is the prick of a kid he raised.

What are your thoughts on the first video?

If pricks are your weakness, how do you like any of these politicians?

 

[Bluto]

I have no idea what the hell this means but I'm laughing my balls off.

 

[connor_in]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

He's funny because he has two first names...
j/k
Have a great weekend everybody...chop down the tree!

 

[pkt77242]

You admit you don't get it and then fume about how stupid something is that you don't understand? Let me educate you on a very simple concept that is integral to any consumption tax discussion.

Prebate - Give every citizen a monthly check, say $300/month. No questions asked. This offsets taxes UP TO a certain consumption level, if the tax is 10% it covers tax on $3000/month of consumption. This gives ADVANTAGE to those who consume less. A family of four starts the month with $1200 in their bank account, regardless of welfare, work or whatever, which would offset taxes on $12,000 a month of consumption. How can anyone with an ounce of intellect call that regressive?

I know a "framework" discussion is impossible with most of you but this is not a hard and fast proposal, rather a simple example.

Ok, based of what you said, how in the hell is it going to not put us more in debt. You are lowering taxes on the rich and giving more money to the poor? Are you using Romney math again?

 

[pkt77242]

Because anything other than "TAX THE RICH!!!!" is bad.

Actually I just think you are a jackass who while probably intelligent doesn't use actual facts (not you RDU, this is aimed at Irishpat183).

If you asked me, I would break up the tax brackets even more. I would raise taxes on people making over 1 million a year by 6% (over what it is now before the Bush tax cuts expire) but I would phase it in over 3 years. So raise it 2% a year. For people between 500K and 1 million I would raise it 4 percent over the 3 years. For people making 250-500K I would raise it 2% over the 3 years and for people making 150-250 I would raise it 1%. I would raise carried interest and other income back to the normal tax rate. I would also start raising the age on social security to 70 for full retirement (over a number of years) and the same things with medicare. I also think we need to revamp unemployment in some way. Maybe make them work 10 hours a week for the state government to earn it while still trying to find a job or something along that line. I think we also need to reduce military spending drastically to help cut down our debt.

I think it is funny when people paint progressive as "Tax the Rich" How about I paint you as "**** the Poor". You only want to take benefites away from the poor but you don't want to take anything from the rich? The key is a well thought out and balanced approach that does raise some taxes and does cut spending. I say $3-4 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases but go ahead and say I want to soak the rich. LMAO

 

[Buster Bluth]

If you asked me, I would break up the tax brackets even more. I would raise taxes on people making over 1 million a year by 6% (over what it is now before the Bush tax cuts expire) but I would phase it in over 3 years. So raise it 2% a year. For people between 500K and 1 million I would raise it 4 percent over the 3 years. For people making 250-500K I would raise it 2% over the 3 years and for people making 150-250 I would raise it 1%. I would raise carried interest and other income back to the normal tax rate. I would also start raising the age on social security to 70 for full retirement (over a number of years) and the same things with medicare. I also think we need to revamp unemployment in some way. Maybe make them work 10 hours a week for the state government to earn it while still trying to find a job or something along that line. I think we also need to reduce military spending drastically to help cut down our debt.

I think it is funny when people paint progressive as "Tax the Rich" How about I paint you as "**** the Poor". You only want to take benefites away from the poor but you don't want to take anything from the rich? The key is a well thought out and balanced approach that does raise some taxes and does cut spending. I say $3-4 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases but go ahead and say I want to soak the rich. LMAO

I wouldn't mind a lot of that. I think I agree most strongly on cutting defense (I wouldn't mind to see a 30% cut, for starters).

I think we should increase welfare receipts but make them earn it. I think we should give "bonuses" to people who have kids who maintain a ~95% attendance rating in school, who make scheduled doctors visits, attend job classes, attend meetings that let the state know their kids are being parented...as well as volunteer for the state/city in community cleanup projects.

I don't mind helping the poor and yeah, you heard this big bad righty say we should increase benefits in welfare programs, but I think first and foremost we should make a program that is designed to fix the fukking problem. In addition to the welfare fix we should fix our sh!tty government public schools and increase the vouchers--and the amount in the voucher so that it covers 90% of school cost. But, not all of the cost. I know Newt Gingrich got a lot of flack for suggesting that kids be janitors, but I fully agree with that. We all had to do it at our Catholic schools growing up.

...I had the privilege of meeting with an alumnus of my high school who struck it rich in the dot-com boom. I have brought him up on here before. He and his family used to work in the farm fields that my grandfather owned, and my grandmother helped pay his tuition and drive him to the Catholic school (along with her 14 kids) and while he came from very poor means, he earned a scholarship to Marshall and is now worth in excess of $100mil.

He had so much money that the school contacted him about giving money (you Catholic school guys know this is a common occurrence haha), he said he'd give them whatever they wanted. He hooked them up with some slick corporate sponsors, $500k of his own money for starters, etc etc etc. The school said that they were in contact with enough rich alumni, donors (e.g. local oil refineries), and the diocese was going to make the parishes pony up too....anyway they were planning on making the school tuition free. He objected and said that he would not donate a penny if they made the school free. He said that if kids and their families aren't at least struggling juuust a pinch, then they aren't taking it seriously. I take that very seriously and agree with it. I've met way too many kids in college and high school who were on full-rides and who didn't give a **** about their schooling as a result.

 

[pkt77242]

I wouldn't mind a lot of that. I think I agree most strongly on cutting defense (I wouldn't mind to see a 30% cut, for starters).

I think we should increase welfare receipts but make them earn it. I think we should give "bonuses" to people who have kids who maintain a ~95% attendance rating in school, who make scheduled doctors visits, attend job classes, attend meetings that let the state know their kids are being parented...as well as volunteer for the state/city in community cleanup projects.

I don't mind helping the poor and yeah, you heard this big bad righty say we should increase benefits in welfare programs, but I think first and foremost we should make a program that is designed to fix the fukking problem. In addition to the welfare fix we should fix our sh!tty government public schools and increase the vouchers--and the amount in the voucher so that it covers 90% of school cost. But, not all of the cost. I know Newt Gingrich got a lot of flack for suggesting that kids be janitors, but I fully agree with that. We all had to do it at our Catholic schools growing up.

...I had the privilege of meeting with an alumnus of my high school who struck it rich in the dot-com boom. I have brought him up on here before. His family and he personally used to work in the farm fields that my grandfather owned, and my grandmother helped pay his tuition and drive him to the Catholic school (along with her 14 kids) and while he came from very poor means, he earned a scholarship to Marshall and is now worth in excess of $100mil.

He had so much money that the school contacted him about giving money (you Catholic school guys know this is a common occurrence haha), he said he'd give them whatever they wanted. He hooked them up with some slick corporate sponsors, $500k of his own money for starters, etc etc etc. The school said that they were in contact with enough rich alumni, donors (e.g. local oil refineries), and the diocese was going to make the parishes pony up too....anyway they were planning on making the school tuition free. He objected and said that he would not donate a penny if they made the school free. He said that if kids and their families are struggling juuust a pinch, then they aren't taking it seriously. I take that very seriously and agree with it. I've met way too many kids in college and high school who were on full-rides and who didn't give a **** about their schooling as a result.

I went to a Catholic school as well and the summer between my junior and senior year I got hired to help their maintenance staff. I layed tile flooring, cleaned swamp coolers, cut down trees, set up interent connections, etc. I also got electrocuted (****** *** wiring) and a hammer drill in the head, but damn I learned a lot that still helps me out to this day.

 

[Bluto]

Both you guys get my vote. I think vouchers are a bad idea though. I've said it before and will say it again that applying capitalist business principals to healthcare and public education are bad ideas. Both should be completely socialized and both should be completely equitable across the board for all in my opinion. If those with greater means choose to pursue other alternatives (private insurance or private school) so be it.

 

[irish1958]

I'm curious about what the people on this board think of Ron Paul?

I have never understood how a physician could have such utter disregard for the welfare of the poor and disadvantaged amongst us.

 

[Bluto]

Interesting article assessing Romney and Obama on education.

LA Times

 

[BGIF]

Catholic Bishops Refute Biden Debate "Fact"

Catholic Bishops Refute Biden Debate "Fact"

USCCB Responds To Inaccurate Statement Of Fact On HHS Mandate Made During Vice Presidential Debate
October 12, 2012

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued the following statement, October 12. Full text follows:

Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:

"With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact."
This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain "religious employers." That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to "Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital," or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.

HHS has proposed an additional "accommodation" for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as "non-exempt." That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation "to pay for contraception" and "to be a vehicle to get contraception." They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.

USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.

For more details, please see USCCB's regulatory comments filed on May 15 regarding the proposed "accommodation": www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel...ulemaking-on-preventive-services-12-05-15.pdf

 

[Buster Bluth]

I saw this thread pop up and was sure that it'd be about that backward woman from Mississippi or wherever saying that it'd be better if women couldn't vote. She is also, apparently, a member of the Tea Party movement.

 

[phgreek]

I saw this thread pop up and was sure that it'd be about that backward woman from Mississippi or wherever saying that it'd be better if women couldn't vote. She is also, apparently, a member of the Tea Party movement.

...anybody missing teeth, runin shine, carrying a gun, and doing all manner of backward stupid crap must be...

 

[jason_h537]

I saw this thread pop up and was sure that it'd be about that backward woman from Mississippi or wherever saying that it'd be better if women couldn't vote. She is also, apparently, a member of the Tea Party movement.

You can make a whole thread of backward *** quotes from the Tea Party. From "legitimate rape", to "evolution is a lie from hell", to "Africans were better off being slaves". That woman is just another example of how bad the whole movement is. The best part is all these quotes are from this year.

 

[RDU Irish]

Biden obviously had his fingers crossed when he said that. Any self respecting American knows that makes his statement of "fact" actually mean "lie." Therefore, Joe Biden did not lie, empatically, directly to millions of Americans.

If you watched the debate, you would know enough to see Biden is not serious about his job or this process, his "facts" only back up my assertion.

 

[BGIF]

Kudos To The Dems

Kudos To The Dems

Circling the wagon and stealing Romney's thunder tonight. Neutralizing the Bengazi gotcha. Twenty four hours before the debate Hillary announces, "I am responsible for security". About a dozen hour laters Rice blames "the intelligent community" for her talking points.

Why do I get the feeling that in another few hours , the White House Press Secretary will announce that all those intelligence people were hired by Bush?


Interesting two straight administrations that couldn't get on the same page with "the intelligent community". Is it the "intelligent community" or "the political community"?

 

[NDFan4Life]

Honey Boo Boo endorses Obama.

<object id="flashObj" width="486" height="412" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,47,0"><param name="movie" value="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="flashVars" value="videoId=1904353079001&playerID=1409164951001&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdRjek0MS21pRzf_GTDAM-xj&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" /><param name="base" value="http://admin.brightcove.com" /><param name="seamlesstabbing" value="false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="swLiveConnect" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1904353079001&playerID=1409164951001&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdRjek0MS21pRzf_GTDAM-xj&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" swLiveConnect="true" allowScriptAccess="always" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object>

That sways my vote.