Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 181
  1. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Unfortunately, in politics, you get the same nonsense from both parties--back room deals, big business-based politics, self-serving political compromises. Republican-led bills like Medicare Part D and the Patriot Act are filled with them as well. Republicans have blocked any meaningful checks on Wall Street behaviors--although Wall Street's unbridled greed is what caused this recession.
    I would agree--most politicians are happy to engage in back room deals. I don't like it no matter who does it.

    Wall Street Greed? No--that isn't it. They merely followed where the Government led them--primarily through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Of course, unlike the old days "Wall Street" isn't a left-right divide. Not saying you are claiming it is, but many assume that outdated belief.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Unfortunately, even you throw out vague terms like "good government" and "true health reform"--which Republicans have been throwing out to prevent Democrats from gaining a political victory (you think Republican opposition is really about getting a better healthcare plan? Pleeeeze.). Those words really mean nothing without plans on how to achieve them.
    Well, I could elaborate on all of those things--my views that is, but I don't want to write a book every time I want to refer to something.

    I think Republican opposition to healthcare has two components 1) Its opposition to something that stinks and is a political mess designed to benefit leftist politicians. 2) The People oppose it, so its really easy to get behind.

    Again, I'm not a Republican, nor do I have any influence on what they do. I've stated several times what I think is needed for Healthcare Reform, and I'd be happy for any Republican or Democrat to forward my preferences.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    This is the government we have now, and this is how it works. You're not going to change the system with one or two elections--as power just goes back and forth between corrupt parties. A longer recession might have gotten Americans up and angry at the system, but as people get comfortable again, we won't care anymore.
    I've said as much many times. How many times have you heard me say this isn't D vs R--it is the people vs the Government.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Sure, I'd love to have politics without the influence of the big donors--but then you would have to have much stronger campaign finance rules (and the Republicans are strongly against that). Washington loves power.
    I don't care about big donors--I care about knowing who the big donors are. No matter how much someone pays--the people (if engaged) trump all of that. Problem is that the people (usually) aren't engaged.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I even assure you that Brown, the new senator from Massachusetts, who says he is a "new" Republican will get swallowed by Washington--let's see what happens in a few years as he gets drunk with big business contributions...
    I've no doubt that he will be as subject to the Washington power as anyone else. However, "big business" contributions I think is only a (relatively) small part. Money really isn't all that hard to come by. Power on the other hand is, and power comes from big government.

    KAM
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214 View Post
    Good riddance to these vile snakes. My post was pretty harsh but I have nothing but contempt for the bile that is left... (should be called the "theft" rather than the left)
    Wow, angry.

    Well, those "vile snakes" are all still there.

    KAM
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    This country is center, not center right. That's a Limbaugh made-up dream.

    The country is angry because it wants jobs and a better economy. Whoever is in would get voted out. It has little to do with actual Obama policies and the healthcare bill. If the economy were doing well, people would retain the status quo no matter what was going on in DC.
    No, it is a center right country, and as I've said--when you look at economic issues is even a more right country.

    True, the country is angry because of the economy, and I wish they would wake up and realize that the government isn't going to save them, or create prosperity for them. Then, people like Barack Obama couldn't get elected, because they'd not be able to sell us on that lie.

    They are also angry, because they see very clearly that Obama is blatantly lying about various things: Bipartisanship, transparency, pragmatic leadership. I'd also not leave out terrorism and handling of that, and other foreign affairs, but that is a lesser issue cared about by fewer people.

    The people are realizing that they've been sold a bill of goods with a fake stimulus package, massive increases in spending (from already reckless levels), and BS like "saved" jobs, which economists do not even see as a credible claim.

    At some point, people get sick of hearing talk and expect people to live up to their speeches, and President Obama is not doing this. In fact, he's doing worse--he's defaulting to just talking more, as if that will somehow become meaningful.

    KAM
  4. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #104  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    This country is center, not center right. That's a Limbaugh made-up dream.

    The country is angry because it wants jobs and a better economy. Whoever is in would get voted out. It has little to do with actual Obama policies and the healthcare bill. If the economy were doing well, people would retain the status quo no matter what was going on in DC.
    We'll see. Although, I have to say that it seems really odd that liberals would all be parroting this same party line that "the voters are angry and would vote out anyone in power" after so many months of telling us all how glorious things are becoming since Obama came into power. Seems you're not giving the voters much credit to be able to see what you're seeing if the situation is indeed getting better.
  5. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    They are growing disenchanted because Obama has not been able to deliver fast enough. Calling it a "pack of lies" assumes that, just because Obama hasn't yet achieved it, it was a lie. That's juvenile thinking, at best.
    I didn't say a COMPLETE pack of lies, but he's lied plenty, and this is plain to see. Most obvious is in regards to transparency, specifically on healthcare. He made this very clear and has blatantly chosen to go back on his word.

    It isn't about whether he's been able to achieve something or not--it is that he literally has lied, and been under complete power to not have done so--as I stated above.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Pleeeze. EVERYONE runs as a centrist--Reagan, Bush I and II, Clinton, and Obama. You cannot win unless you say stuff like "I'm going to bring America back together again and have the parties collaborate again. blah, blah, blah.
    Sure--they throw out those platitudes, because they are politicians. If you think that Reagan didn't run as a Conservative...well, I don't know how to tell you are wrong, except to say so.

    Bush II ran openly as a Compassionate CONSERVATIVE. He even used the word. When is the last time that a Democrat in a national election ran openly declaring themselves a liberal and won?

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    No one talks about shared sacrifice when you cut government funding, but they all talking about "reducing the size of government."
    I'm not sure if there is something here to respond to.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    What's a center-Right country mean, anyway? America is pro-choice and pro-gun rights. It's increasingly understanding that gays should have equal rights (whether through marriage or civil unions) and should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Women and racial/ethnic minorities should be treated equally. ALL Americans hate taxes, but we want to retain the benefits that come with those taxes--good roads, police, schools, military, science research, etc. Americans want a fair healthcare system that covers everyone.

    That sounds like a Center country--not particularly left or right.
    I see where you make your mistake. You falsely assume that equal rights is a leftist ideal. It isn't. That's just your prejudice and inability to understand conservatism.

    We're center right. Ignore that at your own peril.

    KAM
  6. #106  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    This vote is simply a correction. The Democrats rode to a super-majority solely on Obama's coattails and nothing more. Now that the kids are gone from the polls, the responsible voters will start evening the spread to be more reflective of what this country truly is: Center Right.
    Um not quite. The Dems rode to a super majority on a botched unnecessary invasion/occupation and the allowed collapse of the housing market.
  7. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #107  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Without the stimulus package and bail outs, wall street firms, banks, and large companies would have had to close--throwing the entire economy into utter chaos.
    No, that's the "too big to fail" bill of goods that we've been sold. I claim something different--that letting failure take its own toll is healthy in most cases. I claim the very simple logical truth--punishment works, and enabling bad behavior begets more bad behavior. That's what bailouts do--they help companies continue to fail, weakening us long term.

    The stimulus package didn't prevent banks from closing--that's a totally separate boondoggle from these bailouts. Its little more than a wish-list of pet projects, NOT actual stimulus. Its JUST spending without stimulus...or very little at least. Just another excuse to use a crisis to pay off favored groups.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    The American public doesn't understand how Wall Street works and why the government had to pump money into the system to get money flowing fast.
    Actually, they don't understand, which is how they were fooled into tepidly agreeing with this idiotic plan. At a minimum, the whole TARP thing could have been much smaller. Many banks didn't want or need it, but they were forced into it anyway. Money still isn't flowing fast by the way.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    By the numbers, the recession is over--but people only see their lack of jobs.
    By the numbers the Recession didn't start when they said it did either, but why bother with those pesky definitions.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    They THINK they have been lied to because they don't have jobs, but, in actuality, it has been very poor communication by Obama and the Democrats about what they are doing and why.
    No, they've pushed a hoax called the stimulus package on the public, and it is of course not doing what they claimed it would (because it is a hoax), and because it didn't do what would work--which is removing the burden of government from private businesses. In addition, Obama's leftist ideological saber rattling has put the fear of god into business owners who are worried about what government burden is coming next--be it cap and trade, or healthcare, or whatever other destructive policy they can dream up.

    Obama is more than anything guilty of creating and fostering uncertainty. He can't magically wave his hand and make the economy good, but he sure as heck can do some damage, or threaten to do damage, which can have a similar depressive effect.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Republicans, of course, have capitalized on this ignorance and used it for political advantage (The Dems did the same with Bush).
    I'm sure that the Republicans would be happy to turn the tables on the democrats, but I'm not sure they are getting any SPECIFIC traction from it yet. I think actually appealing to Fiscal Conservatism in the independent voter is however a big winner.

    While I would agree that the typical American doesn't have a good understanding of many details issues, I think they can figure out when something is so blatantly off. The promises of the Obama Administration, and their actions are very different. They are busily claiming failures as victories and the people see that for what it is. Fact is--the American Citizen has a GREAT BS meter...when directed at the people in power.

    KAM
  8. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Um not quite. The Dems rode to a super majority on a botched unnecessary invasion/occupation and the allowed collapse of the housing market.
    No--they rode to it on politicians who were willing to call everything a failure. What country are we occupying in the traditional military sense of the word?

    "Allowed collapse" of the housing market? Yes, exactly how was that "allowed."

    The dems rode to a win, based on the blame game, nothing else. It didn't matter if it was accurate or not. They won by claiming to be the opposite of the caricature they created of their opponents.

    KAM
  9. jwinn35's Avatar
    Posts
    390 Posts
    Global Posts
    396 Global Posts
    #109  
    once again when it comes to politics Kam is far and away the most articulate and educated person. Come prepared if you are going to have a debate, not just with what you heard on CNN (communist news network) this morning.
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    No--they rode to it on politicians who were willing to call everything a failure. What country are we occupying in the traditional military sense of the word?
    Puleez. The general public gave the benefit of the doubt in the 2004 election to Bush and soon after realized what a crap pile they were sold.

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    "Allowed collapse" of the housing market? Yes, exactly how was that "allowed."
    Seriously not going to rehash this again. Needless to say, the loss of value on ones home certainly lead to an incumbents out vote.
  11. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Puleez. The general public gave the benefit of the doubt in the 2004 election to Bush and soon after realized what a crap pile they were sold.
    What are you talking about? What "benefit of the doubt" are you referring to, and what "crap pile" are you talking about. I'm not interested in the shared assumptions that might work amongst your liberal friends.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Seriously not going to rehash this again. Needless to say, the loss of value on ones home certainly lead to an incumbents out vote.
    Yes, I'm sure you would love to avoid the actual circumstances, because it reveals the fallacy of the "blame bush" mantra that has been placed on his shoulders in regards to the housing crash. You are right about the result however--even if it was essentially based on a lie, and letting some of the most relevant culprits skate.

    KAM
  12. #112  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    What are you talking about? What "benefit of the doubt" are you referring to, and what "crap pile" are you talking about. I'm not interested in the shared assumptions that might work amongst your liberal friends.
    Iraq.
  13. #113  
    Other then we are all fed up with the government today and we all need to vent in some way, can anyone tell me why we keep doing the same "tit for tat" he did/ she did crap? Can't we just remember the past and say something like, IMO what I would like to see. And this/these are the reasons I would hope we vote or they vote this way. The Obama did this and Bush did that is just plain getting old.

    IMO - it would be nice if EVERYONE voted for the person that is not in power at this time. I don't even think it matters if that person is a D, R or I. Yes, I would like to see it swing back to Republicans but at this point we just need a good spring (fall) cleaning. And with some luck We may get a true "balance" or party power. Both party's need to be kept in check.
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #114  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    True, failure works, but by just letting Lehman Bros, a relatively small Wall Streeter, fail, the economy almost went into a tail spin.
    Guess what...it went into a tailspin anyway. The claim that "it would have been worse" is speculation. It COULD be right, or it could be wrong--meaning we've just set ourselves up for a repeat of the same idiotic problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Yes, the TARP bailouts helped the banks. The idea of the stimulus was to fund as many projects as possible just to get money flowing. Certainly, pet projects were involved--but the whole point was to get money out there.
    Guess what--the money isn't out there, so even if the projects weren't massive wastes of taxpayer money, and an inherent detriment (debt), it still would be a failure, because it needed to be TIMELY (remember Nancy Pelosi preaching about timely, targeted and temporary--of course, none of that need be adhered to when democrats control the show). I've got no particular problem with NEEDED infrastructure projects, but let's not bash the realities of economics to pretend that this is a short term stimumus.


    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Money isn't flowing as well as it should because the stimulus plan was probably half of what it should have been. Looking at the Great Depressions in the US and in Japan, releasing a small amount of stimulus only makes recessions sputter along.
    No--it could have been half the size if it was properly targeted, instead of being a massive giveaway.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Removing government regulations and oversight led us right to this recession. Unbridled greed comes when you're not being watched.
    No, a free market regulates itself very well. What we've actually had is what government does best--a makes a total mess of the Free market. Again--GOVERNMENT action enabled this entire failure. Only via government manipulation did we get to this.

    Now, I know you want to deny this, because looking into the people responsible--the little political operatives who ran in and out of Fannie and Freddie is pretty damning, and forces one to acknowledge that government intrusion into major areas of the economy has been a proven disaster (as it is and will be with healthcare), but that's the core issue here.

    A bank, even if totally unregulated that engaged in the idiotic practices that Fannie Mae and Freddie mac enabled, and through other government manipulation demanded would fail in a free market system, and disappear, having whatever is left of value go to those who don't make idiotic decisions.

    Government manipulation is CENTRAL to this banking mess. You fellows like to create this fantasy world where banks AREN'T highly regulated, and where the government was just surprised to see all this fall into their lap. That is just not true. Government was involved and aware of what was going on at almost every turn, and where they weren't--there was probably hard fraud going on (which they are supposed to prosecute). Of course, massive Fraud at Fannie mae and Freddie mac was regularly ignored and efforts to reform them and their violations were ignored.

    You all want to pretend that no one knew what was happening--they did know, and they simply didn't care to act on the EXISTING regulations.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Americans want immediate results and think that messes made before can be fixed in two seconds.
    Yes, and that's what lying politicians keep them thinking.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If Americans truly had a great BS meter, 97% of incumbents wouldn't get re-elected every time, we wouldn't be in two wars, and we wouldn't have houses and lifestyles we couldn't afford.

    The truth is Americans, in fact, are rather stupid and easily manipulated. Because we have had good economies and few real threats, we had no reason to understand the details.

    I do hope a positive from this recession is that we stop believe BS from all sides.
    There is something you are missing here--the people have to be aware of it. Mostly they aren't. It isn't stupidity--its ignorance. The Obama administration is getting heat, because they are so arrogant that they ASSUME that the people are stupid, and that they can do all this blatant lying and manipulation out in the open. The American people aren't stupid--they are ignorant--big difference.

    They think they can blatantly lie as supposed leaders--in power, like they can in a campaign. Its a lot harder to lead than to just snipe at those who do. That's a painful lesson that President Obama is learning...or perhaps not learning--either way, the result will be the same.

    KAM
  15. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #115  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Iraq.
    What about Iraq? See--there is a real difference between the failure that Democrats worked very hard to declare, and the reality, which while certainly not rosy and filled with problems isn't what lowly politicians and their followers have convinced themselves of.

    The Reality is that despite all the misgivings, a ruthless dictator is out of power and their is a functioning democracy there now--shaky as it might be. Democrats might have benefited from declaring those efforts a failure but I don't share your view.

    The "two wars" line I hear often, seems to conveniently ignore that even President Obama and most democrats claim they were for Afghanistan. I suspect that is a lie from many of them, but they don't have the honesty to come out and say to the American people that they really wouldn't have fought that either. It was merely the easier of the two to claim support of.

    What I see is a lot of folks like yourself buying into your own sales pitch. Or perhaps you are just the victim of the politicians propaganda--I'm not sure I can discern which is which.

    KAM
  16. #116  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    You quit? How does one quit? You opt out of taxation & Laws? Where are you going?
    Shamefully, as a democrat, Im just too stupid (and embarassed) to figure THAT part out quite yet...
  17. #117  
    So we can drop the housing issue blame game, here is a stating in 2003. It was taken off Youtube in the US and maintained on a Canada server. By the way it has come back as of late to Youtube USA.
  18. #118  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    What about Iraq? See--there is a real difference between the failure that Democrats worked very hard to declare, and the reality, which while certainly not rosy and filled with problems isn't what lowly politicians and their followers have convinced themselves of.

    The Reality is that despite all the misgivings, a ruthless dictator is out of power and their is a functioning democracy there now--shaky as it might be. Democrats might have benefited from declaring those efforts a failure but I don't share your view.

    The "two wars" line I hear often, seems to conveniently ignore that even President Obama and most democrats claim they were for Afghanistan. I suspect that is a lie from many of them, but they don't have the honesty to come out and say to the American people that they really wouldn't have fought that either. It was merely the easier of the two to claim support of.

    What I see is a lot of folks like yourself buying into your own sales pitch. Or perhaps you are just the victim of the politicians propaganda--I'm not sure I can discern which is which.

    KAM
    You can tell yourself whatever you want regarding Iraq. The general population increasingly came to see that as an unnecessary mistake and it was hung around the party in power in the 2006 elections.

    Completely supported going into Afghanistan after the 9-11 attacks. Completely supported the Obama campaign pledge of refocusing our efforts from Iraq to Afghanistan.
  19. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #119  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Other then we are all fed up with the government today and we all need to vent in some way, can anyone tell me why we keep doing the same "tit for tat" he did/ she did crap? Can't we just remember the past and say something like, IMO what I would like to see. And this/these are the reasons I would hope we vote or they vote this way. The Obama did this and Bush did that is just plain getting old.
    Yes. Here's the reason. We are trapped in the game that politicians have crafted for us, in order to keep us behaving the way that benefits them.
    Even those of use who understand and acknowledge this are still trapped by it. As long as democrat followers are busy blaming Republican targets (like Bush) for everything--even a year after he's left office, and Republicans can rally around dislike of Pelosi or Reid or Obama, we aren't concentrating on the fact that its us (the citizens) vs them (the politicians). By maintaining this D vs R distraction, we let them maintain their power--even if they trade who has the most marbles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    IMO - it would be nice if EVERYONE voted for the person that is not in power at this time. I don't even think it matters if that person is a D, R or I. Yes, I would like to see it swing back to Republicans but at this point we just need a good spring (fall) cleaning. And with some luck We may get a true "balance" or party power. Both party's need to be kept in check.
    Other than a bit of a learning curve for procedures, I don't believe we would be much worse off if we threw out every member of Congress in favor of a random person from each District (or two for each state for the Senate).

    Republicans...they are good for one thing--being slightly more acceptable than Democrats. With few exceptions, it is definitely a lesser of two evils situation.

    KAM
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #120  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    You can tell yourself whatever you want regarding Iraq. The general population increasingly came to see that as an unnecessary mistake and it was hung around the party in power in the 2006 elections.

    Completely supported going into Afghanistan after the 9-11 attacks. Completely supported the Obama campaign pledge of refocusing our efforts from Iraq to Afghanistan.
    The population was convinced that it was an unnecessary mistake sure. That doesn't mean it is an accurate assessment, or that Democrats didn't endanger our troops in order to score political gains, but issuing endless declarations of failure, encouraging our enemies to continue to fight instead of realizing they couldn't win (like they ultimately did).

    That's great that you support fighting Terrorism at least in Afghanistan, and considering the war in Iraq is now won (whether Iraq succeeds as a country is now really not something the military can insure), that's not much of a stretch. I think at this point refocusing on Afghanistan is a good plan, and I'm happy that President Obama eventually committed to that--at least to a high degree and for at least 1.5 years.

    KAM

Posting Permissions