Let me tell you another story. When I was in the 9th grade there was a similar fight between a big guy and a much smaller guy who I recall was an avid glue sniffer. When the small guy knocked the big guy to the ground he kicked the living shit out of him. I vividly remember that he had on cowboy boots with pointy toes.Thanks for expressing your feelings. And that's the key word, FEELINGS. "...Dark times ahead". LOL.
There are a lot of dead people who don't agree with you. And for what?No they were't.
There are a lot of dead people who don't agree with you. And for what?
Are you forgetting the crash of 2008 where many lost their 401K retirement funds, we had to through trillions of dollars to the banks to avoid catastrophe and throw billions more to the auto industry to save what jobs we had left?I remember back in 2004 when GWB handily won re-election, many forums on the Internet were filled with posts of a similar tone and attitude as the OP. Those people believed the sky was falling and it was midnight in America.
They were wrong.
I find no reason to believe the OP's claims of doom and gloom will be any more prescient than the ones from 2004.
There is no way he would have won the party nomination with that approach.To be fair, I think the thing for Romney is that he really doesn't give a damn about most of those things he flip-flopped on. He sees himself as a management consultant. He cares about making the machine run better, not enforcing social mores. A much smarter tactic that could have beaten Obama in the election would be:
"Abortion? Gay rights? Obamacare? Immigration? I really don't give a damn about those things. In fact, as president, I will promise not to touch any of those things with a ten foot pole. We're in an economic crisis, and all anyone can seem to talk about is social issues. If you elect me, you're doing it for one purpose: to fix this economy. We've already wasted enough time on these side issues, don't make me waste any more. Now here's what I'll do, in fine detail..."
I'm not sure that this approach could have made it through the primary (and for that Republicans have no one to blame but themselves), but it would have done a lot to sway moderates. He also needed to do the italics, but was so afraid that his vision would prove unpopular that he refused. That is sad.
Are you forgetting the crash of 2008 where many lost their 401K retirement funds, we had to through trillions of dollars to the banks to avoid catastrophe and throw billions more to the auto industry to save what jobs we had left?
Are you forgetting the crash of 2008 where many lost their 401K retirement funds, we had to through trillions of dollars to the banks to avoid catastrophe and throw billions more to the auto industry to save what jobs we had left?
There is no way he would have won the party nomination with that approach.
Perhaps not. But that says a lot more about the republican party than it does about Romney, and makes it hard to blame him for his flip-flopping.
Although I personally disagree with it, the Republican economic platform has a lot of pull, but the social platform scares people, especially moderate women and Latinos. If conservatism is going to continue to have influence in this country, they need to learn to let go of some of the issues that they are guaranteed to lose on in the long term.
Bullshit. If you have to say something you don't believe to get elected, then common sense should tell you that you are in the wrong political party.Perhaps not. But that says a lot more about the republican party than it does about Romney, and makes it hard to blame him for his flip-flopping.
...
Bullshit. If you have to say something you don't believe to get elected, then common sense should tell you that you are in the wrong political party.
I can't put myself in those shoes because I'd have to kill myself for being such a scumbag in regard to that tax issue.Put yourself in Romney's shoes: You're someone with deep free-market and flatter tax convictions, but think social issues are irrelevant. The Democratic Party is clearly not an option, as they' just flat out wrong on the one thing you care about. You want to actually be president, so the Libertarian Party is out of the question. Your only option left is to attach to the Republicans, who will make you say some weird things that make you uncomfortable, but who agree with you where you feel it counts. It's not ideal, but it's the bargain you have to make.
I pretty much agree with this and, to give the Romney/Ryan team credit, they kept going back to the primary argument that the big gorilla in the room is the economy. I would argue that Obamacare and the debt fueled entitlement policies are part and parcel of that argument.To be fair, I think the thing for Romney is that he really doesn't give a damn about most of those things he flip-flopped on. He sees himself as a management consultant. He cares about making the machine run better, not enforcing social mores. A much smarter tactic that could have beaten Obama in the election would be:
"Abortion? Gay rights? Obamacare? Immigration? I really don't give a damn about those things. In fact, as president, I will promise not to touch any of those things with a ten foot pole. We're in an economic crisis, and all anyone can seem to talk about is social issues. If you elect me, you're doing it for one purpose: to fix this economy. We've already wasted enough time on these side issues, don't make me waste any more. Now here's what I'll do, in fine detail..."
I'm not sure that this approach could have made it through the primary (and for that Republicans have no one to blame but themselves), but it would have done a lot to sway moderates. He also needed to do the italics, but was so afraid that his vision would prove unpopular that he refused. That is sad.
I can't put myself in those shoes because I'd have to kill myself for being such a scumbag in regard to that tax issue.
This worries me as well....all the arrogance, condescention and disrespect baffles me. Btw I think your last few posts were very insightful. :thumbsup:That's unfortunate. An inability to understand the viewpoints of others is not only unhealthy for civil discourse, but it also makes you incapable of ever convincing them of your own argument.
The people you disagree with aren't idiots, and they genuinely want to do what's best for society. I can't comment on previous eras because I'm too young, but if we ever understood that idea as a society, we appear to have lost it. Even our president was so convinced that his opponent was a buffoon that he didn't bother rehearsing for the first debate.
I am for the most part an optimist, but this unwillingness to believe our political opposites are fully capable humans worries me greatly.
Congratulations to everyone who supported Obama in this election!
Though Obama was not my choice, the country has spoken and your slight majority have opted to have the "leadership" of the last four years continue.
Congratulations to Putin, Chavez, Castro and Ahmadinejad. Your endorsements and support meant a lot to the President. He will be getting back to you now that he has that flexibility he was expecting.
Congratulations to the African-American voters, your 90+ percent support of Obama hasn't stopped your recent increase in unemployment from 13.4 to 14.3 percent, but you stayed true. Black women, of course, took most of the recent hit, with your unemployment rates rising from 10.9 to 12.4 percent, but you have his back and street cred.
Congratulations to the large banks and investment firms and a special congratulations to Goldman Sachs. Your continued support for Obama means we are looking for more quantitative easing and a weakened dollar. You will do extra fine, even if most everyone else doesn't. Power to the .001 percenters!
Congratulations to the unions, especially SEIU and AFL-CIO. Your support may mean there are fewer jobs to be had, but you still have the hope that more of those will go union if you can get card check in place. You spent hundreds of millions to keep your guy in the White House, so I am sure Obama will keep the welcome mat out and the Lincoln bedroom tidy for your overnights, even if now more formerly union jobs will flow to China. The service economy rules!
Speaking of which, congratulations to China, too. You will now get more of our off-shored manufacturing. And the world's oil. And the world's... Well, you get the picture.
Congratulations to the "green" energy companies, both bankrupt and those soon to be bankrupt. While coal and oil and natural gas are going to be much more regulated, to the point of being forced out of business, you will get free taxpayer dollars to build products that no one will buy without government subsidies. Keep your fingers crossed that you get yours before the money runs out.
Congratulations to everyone who wanted free birth control, you will have the $10 a month it now costs you covered. Of course, you will have to deal with economic malaise but that is a small price to pay for a cheap freebie.
Congratulations to the illegals who are here now and are going to be here real soon now. You will be greeted with college educations and medical care that someone else will pay for. You don't even have to speak English, ever, or become Americanized - feel free to keep up your lifestyle just like you lived it in the dictatorship or impoverished state-run economy that you came from. Mi cerveza es la cerveza, amigos!
A big congratulations to the professional political class and the lawyers (pretty much the same, 1%ers all,) you will continue to have tons of other people's money to spend on yourself and a little bit for those that kept you in office. If the money appears to be running short, just print some more and don't forget who your friends are.
I want to offer myself a big congratulations, too! Though I detest Obama and the welfare state that America is developing into, I can say that I am going to make a pile of money now. I was heading into semi-retirement a couple of years ago but moved to Europe to make money off the distressed businesses there and recently moved back to the US after seeing the writing on the wall here. I really, truly did not want to see happen here what I saw in Japan and in Europe, but I make a very good living in keeping companies going under the pressures of onerous government policies. My income will likely double next year - great for me, hope that the tax and regulatory burdens you will now face work out as well for you.
Condolences to everyone in the military, your role will continue to be diminished as our Nobel Peace Prize winning prez does not believe that large scale wars require ships or armor divisions or air squadrons. A few special operators and drones will keep the world safe.
Condolences to Americans serving in hostile environments like Benghazi. If there are budget cuts to be had they will be in the security forces that have kept you safe.
Condolences to small business owners, farmers and anyone who works hard at making a living. As of January, 2013, you can now look forward to the largest tax increase in American history. The next four years will truly be a marvel as the government demands more of your money to pay benefits to those who don't work and won't work. Look on the bright side, you can now keep your unemployed 26 year old kid on your much more expensive health insurance policy.
Condolences to Israel, and likely everyone who lives in the Middle East. You are on your own, guys. Good luck in taking down the Iranians before they nuke you. We will be standing right behind you, way behind you, to see how you do.
Condolences to Europe, too. You think the social welfare states you are living in are bad off now, wait until you see how a weak dollar makes your businesses lose market share and how that 12 percent average unemployment rate continues to edge upward. Spain, Greece, our weak dollar isn't going to tempt us to spend any vacation time visiting you any time soon, good luck with dealing with your own lost generations of unemployed and immigrants. Oh, and thanks for overwhelmingly supporting Obama for a second term so that he can do here what you did to yourselves there.
Condolences to anyone who thought the US was an ally. Those were the good old days, buddies. You might as well start looking out for yourselves real soon now, cause if you aren't a theocratic Muslim country, you are SOL.
I could go on, but with the next four more years the same as the last four years, we are in for some interesting times indeed!
Enjoy! :awe:
I'm speaking in regard to one single issue. Insanely rich people who want lower tax rates. When someone speaks about flattening the tax rates what they are really saying is that poor/middle class people should pay more than they do now and rich people should pay less. If believing that viewpoint to be a dispicable one makes me a bad person then I'll make sure to send you a postcard from hell.That's unfortunate. An inability to understand the viewpoints of others is not only unhealthy for civil discourse, but it also makes you incapable of ever convincing them of your own argument.
The people you disagree with aren't idiots, and they genuinely want to do what's best for society. I can't comment on previous eras because I'm too young, but if we ever understood that idea as a society, we appear to have lost it. Even our president was so convinced that his opponent was a buffoon that he didn't bother rehearsing for the first debate.
I am for the most part an optimist, but this unwillingness to believe our political opposites are fully capable humans worries me greatly.
That's unfortunate. An inability to understand the viewpoints of others is not only unhealthy for civil discourse, but it also makes you incapable of ever convincing them of your own argument.
The people you disagree with aren't idiots, and they genuinely want to do what's best for society. I can't comment on previous eras because I'm too young, but if we ever understood that idea as a society, we appear to have lost it. Even our president was so convinced that his opponent was a buffoon that he didn't bother rehearsing for the first debate.
I am for the most part an optimist, but this unwillingness to believe our political opposites are fully capable humans worries me greatly.
This worries me as well....all the arrogance, condescention and disrespect baffles me. Btw I think your last few posts were very insightful. :thumbsup:
I'm speaking in regard to one single issue. Insanely rich people who want lower tax rates. When someone speaks about flattening the tax rates what they are really saying is that poor/middle class people should pay more than they do now and rich people should pay less. If believing that viewpoint to be a dispicable one makes me a bad person then I'll make sure to send you a postcard from hell.
That's only if you ignore the ability to make that money in the first place comes from the infrastructure in place to make it even possible.Income taxation, to a limited extent, reduces the benefit of success in capitalism. No matter what you plan on doing with the money, there's almost no way that someone in a higher bracket will get back the money that they pay into taxes.
And I think that someone has to be sick in the head to think that way.From that rich person's perspective, they feel that they are being punished for their ability to produce. On the other hand, social welfare programs reduce the cost of failure, allowing people to take bigger risks with their lives and to make sure younger generations have an opportunity for economic mobility.
If I think the minimum wage should be rasied $0.25/hr then I must think raising it $1,000,000,000/hr would be even better, right? Reductio ad absurdum is only valid when not misrepresented as a straw man. I never said there wasn't a cost to a graduated income tax system.If you don't see there being any cost to a graduated income tax system, then why not simply take all income over 250K in taxes? Clearly, one can survive on that amount, so there shouldn't be any problem, right?
Yes. Yes I can. When the Romneys of America have a lower effective tax rate than the middle class I have a very strong argument in my favor supporting my claim that it is unreasonable for them to want it even lower.If you're willing to admit that the above would be a bad idea, then your argument with the Romneys of the world is simply over where that cut off between useful and detrimental taxation lies. Can you then really claim that it is so unreasonable that someone might genuinely think the dividing line is somewhere different than where you place it?
To be fair, I think the thing for Romney is that he really doesn't give a damn about most of those things he flip-flopped on. He sees himself as a management consultant. He cares about making the machine run better, not enforcing social mores. A much smarter tactic that could have beaten Obama in the election would be:
"Abortion? Gay rights? Obamacare? Immigration? I really don't give a damn about those things. In fact, as president, I will promise not to touch any of those things with a ten foot pole. We're in an economic crisis, and all anyone can seem to talk about is social issues. If you elect me, you're doing it for one purpose: to fix this economy. We've already wasted enough time on these side issues, don't make me waste any more. Now here's what I'll do, in fine detail..."
I'm not sure that this approach could have made it through the primary (and for that Republicans have no one to blame but themselves), but it would have done a lot to sway moderates. He also needed to do the italics, but was so afraid that his vision would prove unpopular that he refused. That is sad.
That's unfortunate. An inability to understand the viewpoints of others is not only unhealthy for civil discourse, but it also makes you incapable of ever convincing them of your own argument.
The people you disagree with aren't idiots, and they genuinely want to do what's best for society. I can't comment on previous eras because I'm too young, but if we ever understood that idea as a society, we appear to have lost it. Even our president was so convinced that his opponent was a buffoon that he didn't bother rehearsing for the first debate.
I am for the most part an optimist, but this unwillingness to believe our political opposites are fully capable humans worries me greatly.
Yes. He is asking me to have empathy for poor Romney.The word you're looking for is empathy.