09 Nov 12
Originally posted by kevcvs57I watched CNN CNBC and FOX for a virility of views us the polls closed. FOX took nearly 5 minutes longer than the other networks to finally declare Obama. Few minutes later they were like "Hold On Here!"
It is quite freaky to see how distraught they were (freaky but fun), not the slightest pretense of being cold non partisan journalist's.
Karl Rove was all over paper with pen trying to crunch numbers for Ohio while some of the people in studio looked at him understanding pity.
GOOD TIMES!~
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by sumydidHere is the problem with weak federal government: It is not a stretch to say if big companies get their way, which they have paid well for by now, they can safely go back to shoving the average worker back down where they want them: completely under their thumb ALA 1880.
I get what you are saying, no platform is absolutely perfect, but, Republicans want more money and control in the hands of ALL the people, and less money and power in the hands of the government. I happen to agree with this philosophy, and so did our founding fathers.
Yes, in a true free market society, big business does necessarily gain power. But if I ...[text shortened]... icits, and imminent war in the Middle East (if not imminent world war, but that's a stretch)
If you don't think that can happen, look at what is happening right now to some coal miners, working in conditions that is killing them and do you see the coal companies jumping on a bandwagon to help them out? No, they get sick, tough titty.
That is right now.
So lets jump forward to a time when Repubs control all three branches, they let companies pay for their golden parachutes and the companies make the working conditions they want, namely cheap labor at any cost.
Let me remind you there has been real depression of middle class buying power since the '70's, for instance, minimum wages are way less than the buying power in the '70's.
All that means NOTHING to republicans who jump to the highest bidder.
For instance, you all rail at Obama doing the incentive thing but forget your beloved Bushwhacker did EXACTLY the same thing with one big difference: They deliberately left out the part called 'ACCOUNTABILITY' so 350 BILLION dollars was lost down the drain of some executives golden/diamond/plutonium/platinum parachutes by the hundreds. That money will never be found but you can bet your boopie it is known very well indeed to a select few.
I don't hear ANYONE railing against Bushwhaker for that one.
So Obama does the same thing WITH accountability and now he is the pariah.
You want small government? Just take a trip in a time machine back to 1870 or so, you will see the benefits of small government.
Obviously you can go too far with the big government thing and end up like Soviet Russia trying to control every aspect of people's lives but we are not there and never will be and people who think so are just being paranoid, we are not THAT stupid.
But we by god need a federal government with some backbone to stand up against money grubbing companies who can ONLY bow down to the almighty dollar and don't give a crap what happens to its workers.
Then there is the health care issue.
You have to know health care costs are growing at a rate several times the current inflation rate and why? Because our government doesn't have the backbone to stop them from raising prices willy nilly just in order to make more bucks, the hell with the people under care, people dying in emergency rooms while doctors run around with their thumbs up their asss too busy fingering the nurses to deal with patients.
Meanwhile insurance companies OWN the medical profession, THEY decide what medical treatment a person needs, or more likely, refuse what treatment they REALLY need because they can save a few bucks.
THOSE things are what we dems rail against. And other issues like the economy, need more jobs of course, deal with immigration, gay marriage, legalize grass for god's sake, tax the crap out of it but do SOMETHING to kill the cartels.
Asssholes like Anslinger got us into this mess and we are paying for it in thousands of lives each year in the US and Mexico and South America. All because Hoover and Anslinger decided they hated Jazz and latinos and blacks and to criminalize grass was the easiest way to attack them. You all see how well THAT turned out.
10 Nov 12
6 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseI really do understand your point(s). You make good ones. Just like the Presidential elections, it comes down to a matter of "pick your poison." Which BAD situation do you hate the least. I hate big government more than I hate greedy business.
Here is the problem with weak federal government: It is not a stretch to say if big companies get their way, which they have paid well for by now, they can safely go back to shoving the average worker back down where they want them: completely under their thumb ALA 1880.
If you don't think that can happen, look at what is happening right now to some coa lize grass was the easiest way to attack them. You all see how well THAT turned out.
Not to get too deep here, but, I think it's plain to see that whether it's big government, big business, or just the neighbors next door... we human beings obviously have a big problem with lust for power and greed. It has always been a problem and it always will be, until.... [opinion]that "great and terrible day," as it were.[/opinion]
On the healthcare thing, I only have this to say. I think we can all agree that government--above all other institutions--is horrible about being cost-conscious and doing things correctly and efficiently. Putting the US Government in charge of the nation's health, and who gets what care, or who DOESN'T get what care, etc. is just too frightening for me to imagine. We won't know the full-scale result of this mess until years from now. I might be dead before it all comes to fruition but when it does, my estimation is the people overall as a whole, will have suffered far greater than they would have if healthcare was reformed in other, superior ways we had available, that didn't involve a social experiment and government takeover.
Anyway, good points and I appreciate you being forthright and mature with your argument.
Originally posted by BusygirlI started a thread merely MINUTES after one of the most important Presidential elections ever to have occurred in this country, and expressed my disappointment, and your contribution to the thread is that I'm being a "crybaby" for not letting it go? Is that what you tell people when they grieve over the death of a loved one? In your opinion, how long is someone allowed to lament a major, traumatic situation? Is 5 seconds too much?
I'm not making any assumptions at all. I am calling you a cry baby because that is what you are. You didn't get your way so you are lamenting and bemoaning your losses, and the losses of your children and your grandchildren and all future generations yet unborn because the country has now "literally shredded the constitution and the bible."
You are right ...[text shortened]... ounded exagerations, hyperboles and racist/sexist/homophobic generalizations. Carry on then.
If I created this thread 2 years after the election, you might have a point. But I'm discussing current events. Do you have anything of substance to contribute?
Yes, over half the country voted for a President that--as history has shown us--has complete disregard for the US Constitution, and, heads up a party who hates God and the bible so much, they had to take a vote (which was close) on whether or not to outwardly "remove God" from their platform. There are too many instances to mention here, that make obvious the contempt Obama has for Christians and our God. I don't know what religion he truly follows but, if you listened to one of his campaigners, MADONNA, she made a point to tell her audience to vote for Obama because "how cool is it that a Black Muslim is our President?" Her words, not mine. The kids loved it though. Ate it right up. Google it.
I'm not bitter about the election, I'm just sad that--in unprecedented fashion, this country is headed directly toward Socialism and away from God... and unquestionably, more than half the country supports it. One can no longer (and probably never again argue) that the US is a "Christian Nation." We are in completely uncharted waters.
10 Nov 12
Originally posted by PhlabibitI got the feeling all the way up to the campaign that Rove was blowing smoke. All he could really say was, the polls were skewed and he knew better.
I watched CNN CNBC and FOX for a virility of views us the polls closed. FOX took nearly 5 minutes longer than the other networks to finally declare Obama. Few minutes later they were like "Hold On Here!"
Karl Rove was all over paper with pen trying to crunch numbers for Ohio while some of the people in studio looked at him understanding pity.
GOOD TIMES!~
Well, he was completely wrong. His credibility has been severely damaged.
(I know, I know, he never had any credibility.. but.. the shred he might have had is gone, let's put it that way)
10 Nov 12
Originally posted by sumydidThe last time I looked at a history book I'm sure I remember something about the United States being founded upon the principal of "Freedom of Religion". That is not the freedom to be whatever flavor of Christian you desire, but freedom to choose ANY religion, including Muslim, Hindu, Hebrew, New Age, Wiccan, and even, (gasp) the right to choose to have no religious affilaition or preferance at all. There is nothing uncharted or horrifying about the concept that our president may or may not be a Muslim. Frankly, that should be the least of your concerns. What should concern you is that he is willing to uphold the principal of freedom of religious choice for everyone.
I started a thread merely MINUTES after one of the most important Presidential elections ever to have occurred in this country, and expressed my disappointment, and your contribution to the thread is that I'm being a "crybaby" for not letting it go? Is that what you tell people when they grieve over the death of a loved one? In your opinion, how long is so ...[text shortened]... argue) that the US is a "Christian Nation." We are in completely uncharted waters.
And if someone, anyone, had died as a result of this election I might be inclined to be more understanding about your lament. No one died. It was a presidential election. It happens every four years. There is no trauma surgeon needed on call.
What I believe I am adding to this discussion is the idea of balance and fair play. Reasonableness. Intelectual integrity.
You should try it sometime. It helps people be more interested in listening to what you have to say when what you have to say has some semblance of a valid point. Histrionics won't earn you my ear.
Originally posted by sumydid"Rest assured, I didn't forget about the female demographic, and, yes, you too were pandered to and taken advantage of (Sandra Fluke? Wasn't she key note speaker at the Liberal convention or something? Give me a BREAK! Little rich, entitled snob wants to shack up with anything with 3 legs, and demands that the government pay for her contraceptives? Are we serious, folks? I guess we the American taxpayers should also be on the hook for the extinguishing of any stupid babies that get in her way as well?)."
That's a very hateful thing to say.
Hate begets Hate, something you fundie right wing hypocrite's might want to keep in mind. I bet you are the only ones with a god given right to express how you feel, pfft.
Originally posted by kevcvs57[/b]Yes, this was way over the top, like much in the Debates forum.
"Rest assured, I didn't forget about the female demographic, and, yes, you too were pandered to and taken advantage of (Sandra Fluke? Wasn't she key note speaker at the Liberal convention or something? [b]Give me a BREAK! Little rich, entitled snob wants to shack up with anything with 3 legs, and demands that the government pay for her contraceptives? Are w in mind. I bet you are the only ones with a god given right to express how you feel, pfft.
Originally posted by sumydidI voted for him, I thought he was the best of 2 lousy choices. Definately not going to vote for a couple of guys that are going to grind up some more of our kids like hamburger in a machine over in the Middle East in the name of the invisible guy in the sky. Definately not going to vote for a couple of guys who think our senior citizens are an inconvenience we have to deal with. Just think, If we stopped giving money to seniors, we could buy even more drones to blow up peasants in sandland. And the rich get richer.....granted we have a debt that is so huge it may not matter, but lets not forget that this ball got rollin long before Obama took office. Last time I checked to all you savvy investors out there, the Dow has almost doubled since he took office. Not bad for a Dem🙂 Can you imagine Romney dying in office and Ryan taking over? Might as well have Hitler in there for all the difference it would make.
That's what the headline is on TV.
Welp, if that's correct, then I am dismayed. I can't understand why this country would vote in favor of another 4 years of out-of-control government growth and spending. We (again, assuming the headline is correct) are now headed full-speed into Greece X 100. There is no way our economy can withstand another 4 years o ...[text shortened]... madinejad and Vladmir Putin just popped the cork on a fine bottle of champagne. Well done.
Originally posted by sumydid
I wouldn't know, because I'm not wealthy. But, I wonder what the tax rate is for those horrible rich people. 45% or something I think... and, once you add in sales tax, gas tax, and all the other hidden taxes, it's probably about 60%. I guess that's not enough by your standards, but I have to ask. What do you think our founding fathers were running AWAY no more than what they are forced to pay?
Talk about double standards..... sheesh.
I wouldn't know, because I'm not wealthy. But, I wonder what the tax rate is for those horrible rich people. 45% or something I think... and, once you add in sales tax, gas tax, and all the other hidden taxes, it's probably about 60%. I guess that's not enough by your standards, but I have to ask. What do you think our founding fathers were running AWAY from?The top income tax rates have changed considerably since the end of World War II. Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The average tax rate faced by the top 0.01% of taxpayers was above 40% until the mid-1980s; today it is below 25%. Tax rates affecting taxpayers at the top of the income distribution are currently at their lowest levels since the end of the second World War. -- Congressional Research Service, Taxes and the Economy: An Economic Analysis of the Top Tax Rates Since 1945
Do Liberals not understand that the American Dream is all about? Do Liberals really think that by demonizing and punishing wealthy people, it will spontaneously create a strong economy? What do Liberals think will happen to the Entrepreneurial spirit (which has always been the driving force for this country's success, since its inception), when any incentive to create wealth is taken away by enormous taxes and people wishing you dead because you succeed?The Congressional Research Service concludes in its above-named report:
"The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities."
It is the top 1% in this country who are involved with almost ALL the "redistribution of wealth" ever experienced in this country, only unlike what the Republicans claim, the redistribution is from the poor to the rich.
The middle class is calling. They would like some of their money back. May God give President Obama the backbone necessary to do what is right.
As far as your ad hominem (as it were) attacks on me go, I do not "hate" the rich, but I do despise the evil and greed which makes the Republicans try to fill their bank accounts off the backs of the poor, and this includes cutting necessary social services just so money can be saved in the budget so it can be diverted to the rich through such pipelines as Defence, Oil, and basic Corporate Welfare (tax incentives and other). The lower the tax rates go, even MORE money must be drawn from the poor via social services cutting. But even that's not enough. The Flat Tax people want to further grind down the poor through crippling sales tax increases.
The real reason Ronald Reagan is sanctified by the Republicans was because of The Tax Reform Act of 1986, which served to ease tax burdens on "everybody", but its biggest effect was to concentrate income at the top. In 1984, the top 1% of income earners received 8.4% of national income, while in 1989 it increased to 13.5%. Prior to this, lawmakers had resisted efforts to shove money to the top. This act broke the "glass ceiling" on this and Republicans haven't looked back. GWB's tax cuts was just "more of the same", notably in the reduction of the Capital Gains Tax to 15%. This is where a majority of the 1% save most of their money from the IRS.
Wanting to make money is one thing. Wanting to have ALL the money is quite another. It's about damn time the middle class figured this out about the Republicans. Maybe just enough of them did by November 6th this year.
Go look at the report yourself:
https://www.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf
This document has been in the news since it was leaked to the NY Times just before the election. (Normally, CRS reports are usually only archived for use of members of Congress.) Republicans have been busy trying to suppress this document ever since. October surprise? Indeed.