|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
08-04-2011, 01:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
 . But yes, unlike you, I think there is a vast difference between the goals and methods of the two major political parties in the country. They have never been further polarized and apart. But where the worse the far right can do is bring down the country irrepairably (IMO) with dangerous, proven-unworkable fiscal policy and direct attacks on the poor, old, and have-nots; the worse the far left could do to me would be give me universal health care. Yes, I agree many politicians from both sides are simply corporate lobbyist-owned whores. But there are good politicians in Washington, trying to do the right thing. Quote:
It's about the only way to find a job nowadays. We are a world community and economy, no longer separate countries who can keep their borders closed and their states separate from all other interaction. And that connection is essential. That type of connection is what just enabled the Arab Spring. Face it - America has fallen far behind other first world countries in most objective measurements of those things that build a quality life, and happiness. The rest of the world looks at us and thinks we are crazy. They wonder why we have destroyed our greatness. And the GOP has become so far right and polarized, compared to where they have been throughout my lifetime, that they now are just a shell company shilling for the wealthy. They have lost all humanity and social consciousness (health care and good social programs have been Republican goals for much of my lifetime) My politics haven't changed - the GOP is now irrelevant and blatently counterproductive to any progress and growth of this country at all, and I'm left with trying to work with what's left. Part of the Democratic party has moved so far right to embrace many of my political views. BTW, even our Democratic party views is considered "far right" or "very conservative" in many other first world countries. In the late 1940's and 1950's, our federal policies created a great, upwardly mobile middle class. That - enabled consumerism - is what grows a country and creates jobs. And it did. We boomed. We have spent the past 40 years, however, destroying those policies that created and enable the middle class, thus our middle class is now practically gone - our incomes haven't moved upwards in decades. The top 1% hold all the money. There is nobody left to be a consumer and grow the economy. Thus we are imploding. It's as simple as that. In the Monopoly game, when one person has all the wealth, the game is over. That's where we are in America. Should the holder of the wealth give money away to others, to keep the game in play? No, of course not. But the game should be set up to allow everyone to play. And, if you read the real rules of Monopoly, something we all do not do, when you land on a property and can't afford to buy it, is that the property is supposed to be auctioned to the highest bidder among the other players. We don't do that, when we play Monopoly. That's like America - the rules have been changed to favor one person owning everything, rather than interactive, thriving growth among all. The GOP has spent forty years changing the rules to favor that, and the left has passively allowed them to do it. Now we are there. The vast wealth of this country, trillions, are in the hands of the few. The GOP attacks the left for wanting them to give away their money. No, that's false (but it's a good straw man) - the left just wants the rules to be fair. The amazing thing, in that You Tube clip I posted about wealth, is that out of the top 400 wealthiest Americans, 200 of them are "progressive" or "liberal", and want different policy. How come they can't force that? Think about it.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts Last edited by Riot : 08-04-2011 at 02:12 PM. 
|
|
#2
08-04-2011, 08:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The current President, albeit a failure, is the son of a mother who married an absentee, polygamist, husband. He has an accused rapist brother, who can't travel to England much more the US and a aunt he doesn't know who was living here illegally in US PAID now SS Fund credits, public housing and is now here legally and still living off US PAID now SS Fund credits, rent payments A President who was a lawyer who never tried a case. A Harvard grad with no transcripts. Meanwhile having a wife who had a 200K plus healthcare job yet never stepped foot in medical school  Of course he's playing Candyland and thinks it's Monopoly. But he still was able to stumble into the game. Of course bailing out the idiot next to him, who thought railroads were the way to go, cost him the game.
|
|
#3
08-05-2011, 05:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bottom line here is a CEO has the same amount of votes as a bum that has been on welfare and has never paid a dime in taxes. So the Dems want us to get to the point where more than 50% of the country doesn't pay taxes and all these bums will vote for the Dems because they have no pride. Us hard working Republicans are going to be screwed in the future....ouch
|
|
#4
08-05-2011, 05:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
08-05-2011, 12:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#6
08-08-2011, 08:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/op...pagewanted=all
What Happened to Obama?By DREW WESTEN Published: August 6, 2011 Drew Westen is a professor of psychology at Emory University and the author of “The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.” an excerpt: Like most Americans, at this point, I have no idea what Barack Obama — and by extension the party he leads — believes on virtually any issue. The president tells us he prefers a “balanced” approach to deficit reduction, one that weds “revenue enhancements” (a weak way of describing popular taxes on the rich and big corporations that are evading them) with “entitlement cuts” (an equally poor choice of words that implies that people who’ve worked their whole lives are looking for handouts). But the law he just signed includes only the cuts. This pattern of presenting inconsistent positions with no apparent recognition of their incoherence is another hallmark of this president’s storytelling. He announces in a speech on energy and climate change that we need to expand offshore oil drilling and coal production — two methods of obtaining fuels that contribute to the extreme weather Americans are now seeing. He supports a health care law that will use Medicaid to insure about 15 million more Americans and then endorses a budget plan that, through cuts to state budgets, will most likely decimate Medicaid and other essential programs for children, senior citizens and people who are vulnerable by virtue of disabilities or an economy that is getting weaker by the day. He gives a major speech on immigration reform after deporting a million immigrants in two years, breaking up families at a pace George W. Bush could never rival in all his years as president. THE real conundrum is why the president seems so compelled to take both sides of every issue, encouraging voters to project whatever they want on him, and hoping they won’t realize which hand is holding the rabbit. That a large section of the country views him as a socialist while many in his own party are concluding that he does not share their values speaks volumes — but not the volumes his advisers are selling: that if you make both the right and left mad, you must be doing something right.
|
|
#7
08-08-2011, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
don't run out of ammo.
|
|
#8
08-05-2011, 05:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I call Red-Board
|
Hybrid Mode
