No matter which side you are on, this dude is just so wrong for this country.
No matter which side you are on, this dude is just so wrong for this country.
Yeah and police impersonating Mitt Romney is so right.
Oh dear.
Originally Posted by MUSICMANN
Yes he is. Mitt will be an adequate replacement & improvement, but we are so far off the edge of the cliff it is going to take way more than just an adequate President. It's going to take someone similar to Scott Walkers 'fuck you I'm doing this because that's what I promised and it's the right thing to do' attitude. (Even those who hate or disagree with Walker have to admit his resolve is great and he did exactly what he said he would do if elected).
“Great losses often bring only a numb shock. To truly plunge a victim into misery, you must overwhelm him with many small sufferings.”
That video sums up his entire legacy. Private sector is fine....we need to pump more money into the government sector. He fucking HATES the private sector & success from hard work.
Everyone who lives "inside the Beltway" is so completely out of touch with America.
I live in HELL, and I could tell you what the average American sinner is going through on a daily basis than those who live in your nation's capitol.
But then, I'm just a well informed Devil.
Eternally Under the Authority of Satan
no it doesn't.
republicans have been bitching about obama pumping money into the private sector. so now, when it's clear that they won't do anything additional in the private sector, rather than saying, "well, we're fucked," obama went with, the private sector's fine. now, without question, stupid wording. but by no means are republicans blameless.
The American citizens need to get off their lazy asses and stop expecting someone to do everything for them. Do something for yourself. No new president can fix all the problems and frankly public apathy and laziness is the biggest problem. They want you to stay lazy and complacent because you need the system more when you are that type of person. The biggest fear a control freak has is people no longer needing them and right now we are ruled by control freaks.
It's not the private sector vs the government. It's about corruption. Obama has given the private sector plenty of money when he bailed the banks out and gave lucrative government contracts to private companies. The problem is only a few insiders benefitted and not the public as a whole. Obama has increased the size of government which I doubt much of it goes to productive purposes. But then Bush was doing the same damn thing but Obama has beat the chimp on the amount of money wasted. So this partisan argument is all about who wastes the least amount of money.
Last edited by Nitro Express; 06-10-2012 at 05:38 PM.
Actually the only recession proof booming real estate market has been the Washington DC area. The increase of government jobs when the rest of the country is losing theirs has kept Washington DC isolated from reality.Everyone who lives "inside the Beltway" is so completely out of touch with America.
I live in HELL, and I could tell you what the average American sinner is going through on a daily basis than those who live in your nation's capitol.
But then, I'm just a well informed Devil.
Police impersonating? What? Mitt is dressing up like Sting and singing A Doo Doo Doo A Da Da Da?
You want to know how to define "out of touch"?
How about someone who thinks teachers, policemen, and firefighters are the enemy?
Word to Mittens: The real "lesson" from the fiasco in Wisconsin is NOT that "government is bad". It's that Shittyzens United and the KKKoch Brothers are far worse, and that Hitler & his henchman Joe Goebbels were 666% correct when they said that you repeat the same lie to people over and over again, and eventually they will believe it.
Sadly, most of the real estate market in the beltway, especially Northern Virginia, is not from government jobs themselves, but from the "defense" industry jobs which have grown since the BCE created two useless wars and the Reichland Security industry.
I think the people do more to reinforce the two-party system than the parties do. Criticize one party, the other party is immediately brought up. Pavlov would be proud.
Pavlov is an asshole. That fool sneaks up on my dog Cerberus with his goddamn bells all the time, and Cerberus falls for it.
Nothing like having a 3 headed dog barking like crazy at 3:00 AM
You're kind of mixing up your mythologies there a bit.
There's over half a million fewer government employees under Obama. LINK
Eat Us And Smile - The Originals
"I have a very belligerent enthusiasm or an enthusiastic belligerence. I’m an intellectual slut." - David Lee Roth
"We are part of the, not just the culture, but the geography. Van Halen music goes along with like fries with the burger." - David Lee Roth
Yeah, only if we had a man-of-the-people who knew what it was like to struggle in the middle class--like Mitt Romney!
If only we had more truly independent third party candidates like Ron Paul...
The system was created to be a two party system. It has its glaring disadvantages, but then again, the gov't doesn't collapse when ever a toilet gets plugged as often happens in multiparty states...
Unlike WRONGney, yeah....
Taking that quote out of context is dumb, because his point was with 27 months of continuous private sector job growth under his Administration, the private sector may not be "doing fine", but it's certainly doing better, and is on track to recovering.
Walker is just endemic of the Ryan rationale that balanced budgets are more important than the quality of people's lives, and Mitt Romney is right alongside him in sharing that philosophy.
Why should I admire Walker's resolve for doing the wrong thing?
Austerity smacks of retreating in the face of a threat. And the current republican embrace of austerity and balanced budgets only applies to cutting services and programs for those who need them the most, while offering savings in costs and taxes to those who need them the least.
Obama's presidency is clearly a letdown to progressives, but the alternatives are even greater leaps backward.
Scramby eggs and bacon.
you do realize that the ad criticizing one party was the work of the other party, right? this thread was ALWAYS about both parties. there's nothing pavlovian about that...
No, Mitt spent some time at his prep school dressing up as a Michigan State Trooper (Using a uniform he got through his dad's (The governor's) office, putting a red flashing light on top of his white vehicle and pulling people over. One of the instances he did this was with two of his buddies who had dates in the car - Mitt pulled them over, and after the girls were properly terrified, he and his buddies sped off and left them on the dark on the side of the road. All in good fun, you understand.
You can vote for Gary Johnson.
Johnson holds fiscally conservative, socially libertarian views, and a philosophy of limited government and military noninterventionism. Johnson is in favor of simplifying and reducing taxes. During his governorship, Johnson cut taxes fourteen times and never increased them.[81] Due to his stance on taxes, political pundit David Weigel described him as "the original Tea Party candidate". Johnson supports balancing the federal budget immediately. He supports "slashing government spending", including Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security entitlements. His plans include cutting Medicare and Medicaid by 43 percent and turning them into block grant programs, with control of spending in the hands of the states to create "fifty laboratories of innovation". He advocates passing a law allowing for state bankruptcy and expressly ruling out a federal bailout of any states. In his campaign for the Libertarian Party nomination, he stated he opposed foreign wars and pledged to cut the military budget by 43 percent in his first budget as president. He would cut the military's overseas bases, uniformed and civilian personnel, research and development, intelligence, and nuclear weapons programs. He is opposed to the United States' involvement in the War in Afghanistan and the Libyan Civil War. He has stated that he does not believe Iran is a military threat, would use his presidential power to prevent Israel from attacking Iran, and would not follow Israel, or any other ally, into a war that it had initiated. Johnson is a strong supporter of civil liberties and received the highest score of any candidate from the American Civil Liberties Union for supporting drug decriminalization and online freedom while opposing USA PATRIOT, enhanced airport screenings, and the indefinite detention of prisoners. Johnson endorsed same-sex marriage in 2011; he has since called for a constitutional amendment protecting equal marriage rights, and criticized President Obama's position on the issue as to have "thrown this question back to the states."
Johnson is a younger Ron Paul with a bad rug. He's great on weed, wars, and weddings, but when it comes to economic issues he might as well be another Koch whore.
I'm not endorsing him, just pointing out there is another option.
What I think is silly in elections is people who don't vote for someone because they think that they can't win.
That is nuts because it makes a few logical mistakes. Firstly that your vote is going to be the deciding one in the election, secondly that a vote for someone that doesn't win has no influence it does(if eg an environmental candidate starts getting 5% of votes the main parties will go after those votes by being more green) and finally that if you vote for the guy that wins even if he wasn't your real choice, him winning is somehow a success for you.
Well, between Shittyzens United media propaganda saturation, and Diebold manipulation of the votes (to the point where in some states you cannot verify a single vote) it's really difficult to do better than the duopoly.
Of course if everyone who says they're sick and tired of this dragonshit in Washington DC actually turned up at the polls and voted for Rocky Anderson, or even Gary Johnson, and they let it be known that they did so, then the misinformed masses might have to sit up and take notice when the mediawhores announced that either Barry or Mittens "won" the election. Because if everyone truly voted their conscience (yeah, I know... the Devil preaching about conscience???? But I digress....) the duopoly would either cease to exist entirely, or else be exposed as a fraudulent system the likes of which Joe Stalin and Saddam Hussein would be jealous of.
And trust me, they are!
it's a shame huh
That wasn't what I meant ... and it wasn't just a comment on this thread. Anyone, almost anywhere in this forum or around the world, criticizes Obama -- someone else will invariably attack Romney. Or the GOP. Anyone criticizes the GOP, here or elsewhere... someone else will shoot back at the Dems and Obama.
My only point is that I don't think that "well the other guy sucks too!" has ever been a meaningful or effective argument for putting someone forward as a preferred candidate.
You mean government leech jobs. I read an article about the cost plus government contracts in Iraq and it made me mad as hell. If a truck got a flat tire they would just torch the truck and bill the new one to the government. Shit like that.
The number of federal employees grew by 123,000, or 6.2%, under President Obama, according to the White House's Office of Management and Budget.
Much of the hiring increases came in the departments of homeland security, justice, veterans and defense.
The federal payroll has been expanding since President Bush took office, after declining during the Clinton administration. But it's still a tad smaller than it was in 1992, said Craig Jennings, a federal budget expert at the progressive think tank OMB Watch.
The federal government has been one of the few areas that's grown during the economic downturn. The private sector remains down 1.1 million jobs from the start of 2009, while state and local governments have shed 635,000 positions.
I guess it's whether you trust the white house statistics over the department of labor statistics. I was once told if you want to go broke, trust government statistics.
Notice I did not say word 1 about Republicans. Thought we were talking about Obama? The whole "but the other guys" schtick is getting tired & getting us no where.
Perhaps the people who need them most won't once things start to get straightened out? And that starts with our governments spending no more than they receive.
Enough of this partisan bickering. How about how both Republicans and Democrats in Washington basically say they have the rights to everything and us citizens have no rights including those documented in the constitution itself. I'm sorry but when the US president and a majority of the US Senate decide to violate their oath of office we have big problems. We have a rogue government right now and a bunch of these people need to be elected out, repealed and impeached out of office. You have friends of the president literally steal billions of dollars and nothing has happened to them. These are the big issues. It's called runaway corruption and you really have no law and order or even a functioning government when this becomes the norm.
Hey, how do you know Pavlov isn't in Hell? Totally possible.
I could also vote for Mickey Mouse (and a dozen other candidates), but the system is predicated on him not winning also...
I don't disagree, I've stated here that the U.S. Democrats and GOP should be divided into at least four or five parties. But one must also acknowledge the relative stability of a two-party system and that has some merit...
Oh please. Whose doing the "criticizing?"
Maybe you and I haven't been reading the same thread, much less the same forum??
Go read the first two posts in this thread if you want an example.
Lol.
Last edited by Dr. Love; 06-11-2012 at 10:16 AM.
Is that Roger Clemens at :16? As the smear campaign gets under way...
I don't know that a system with more parties would lead to our government collapsing more often... I think that has more to do with a parliamentary system than ours. Congress would be comprised of multiple parties, the executive would still be one. The judiciary would be staffed with people from several.
Diversity of viewpoints can only be better on balance I think (which we agree on).
The stats you used are pretty close to what's currently on the federal payroll... but it's not the whole picture. Because of the relative easy access to federal employment numbers congress and the white house has been carefully utilizing federal contractors at an alarming rate. This isn't recent... been going on for a few decades. Nor does it have any party boundaries...
It enables Washington to say hey look the government payroll has not changed all that much... but if you factor in federal contractors... well it's boomed... a ton.
"If you want to be a monk... you gotta cook a lot of rice...”
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote