OK, so without going into graphs, or polls or any other form of data manipulation, ooops, I meant research, and please just answer one question I have asked before and never received the answer to.
In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems. So why isn't the U.S. in better shape then they are? Did the Dems. just ruin what was a good thing since O'bama took over? I thought the last time the U.S. was in a budget surplus position was under Clinton?
I know the temptation will be to attack these questions, but will one of you please give me some explanation as an interested person from outside of the U.S. and it's politics? I really don't understand and am asking, seriously for some enlightenment.
Yea, I'm with Kreig on this one, you are mistaken that the Republicans have been in control more than the Democrats... Check the history again. Also during most of the budget surplus of Bill Clinton, the Republicans controlled the House and Senate... I know those facts are hard to manipulate to fit your point of view, but it's true. Democrats have controlled congress for 36 of the last 50 years.
OK, so without going into graphs, or polls or any other form of data manipulation, ooops, I meant research, and please just answer one question I have asked before and never received the answer to.
In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems. So why isn't the U.S. in better shape then they are? Did the Dems. just ruin what was a good thing since O'bama took over? I thought the last time the U.S. was in a budget surplus position was under Clinton?
I know the temptation will be to attack these questions, but will one of you please give me some explanation as an interested person from outside of the U.S. and it's politics? I really don't understand and am asking, seriously for some enlightenment.
Yea, I'm with Kreig on this one, you are mistaken that the Republicans have been in control more than the Democrats... Check the history again. Also during most of the budget surplus of Bill Clinton, the Republicans controlled the House and Senate... I know those facts are hard to manipulate to fit your point of view, but it's true.
Krieg:
laker1963:
OK, so without going into graphs, or polls or any other form of data manipulation, ooops, I meant research, and please just answer one question I have asked before and never received the answer to.
In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems. .
Might not have gotten an answer because people probably are not sure what you are talking about... Dems have been in power more...not Republicans..., Might wanna do some more manipulation..errr I mean research before you start posting stuff as facts.
That's funny. You two seem to be saying the oposite thing Puro. But I'll leave that, as it speaks for itself.
Krieg your chart shows that the Republicans have held the Presidency 18 time to the Democrats 15 times. Where I went to school 18 is bigger than 15. I guess you are left to splitting hairs on this one and now the party who holds the Presidency is no longer considered the party in power?!
Because the President doesn't write bills or even vote on bills... Those are written and voted on by congress. The President just signs or vetos bills. I'll credit Bill Clinton with signing into law legislation passed by a Republican congress that led to a budget surplus, because that is what happened. The party with the President in office is NOT always the party in power. Just like the last several years of the Bush administration had a Democrat controlled congress.
OK, so without going into graphs, or polls or any other form of data manipulation, ooops, I meant research, and please just answer one question I have asked before and never received the answer to.
In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems. So why isn't the U.S. in better shape then they are? Did the Dems. just ruin what was a good thing since O'bama took over? I thought the last time the U.S. was in a budget surplus position was under Clinton?
I know the temptation will be to attack these questions, but will one of you please give me some explanation as an interested person from outside of the U.S. and it's politics? I really don't understand and am asking, seriously for some enlightenment.
Yea, I'm with Kreig on this one, you are mistaken that the Republicans have been in control more than the Democrats... Check the history again. Also during most of the budget surplus of Bill Clinton, the Republicans controlled the House and Senate... I know those facts are hard to manipulate to fit your point of view, but it's true.
Krieg:
laker1963:
OK, so without going into graphs, or polls or any other form of data manipulation, ooops, I meant research, and please just answer one question I have asked before and never received the answer to.
In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems. .
Might not have gotten an answer because people probably are not sure what you are talking about... Dems have been in power more...not Republicans..., Might wanna do some more manipulation..errr I mean research before you start posting stuff as facts.
That's funny. You two seem to be saying the oposite thing Puro. But I'll leave that, as it speaks for itself.
Krieg your chart shows that the Republicans have held the Presidency 18 time to the Democrats 15 times. Where I went to school 18 is bigger than 15. I guess you are left to splitting hairs on this one and now the party who holds the Presidency is no longer considered the party in power?!
Because the President doesn't write bills or even vote on bills... Those are written and voted on by congress. The President just signs or vetos bills. I'll credit Bill Clinton with signing into law legislation passed by a Republican congress that led to a budget surplus, because that is what happened. The party with the President in office is NOT always the party in power. Just like the last several years of the Bush administration had a Democrat controlled congress.
+1, not having the presidency doesn't mean u don't have control of congress. Congress can override a presidential veto if they have enough votes.
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
Yea, the truth is hard to battle. A Democrat President doesn't meant the Democrats are in control of the government, and the same applies to Republicans. You asked a question and got an honest answer, and then you ridicule the people who answered you... Don't tell me you're wasting brain cells. If you ask a serious question and don't want a serious answer then don't ask... What more did you want exactly?
Since 1945 there have been 18 2-year terms where Democrats controlled both House and Senate
11 of those terms they also had a Democrat President.
Since 1945 there have been 6 2-year terms where Republicans controlled both House and Senate
2 of those terms they also had a Republican President.
Who has held control the most in the last 60+ years?
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
That's your response? Seriously? You demanded a serious answer, and they provided well-research, documented answers. You don't like it so you stomp your foot and fold your arms. Not funny at all.
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
That's your response? Seriously? You demanded a serious answer, and they provided well-research, documented answers. You don't like it so you stomp your foot and fold your arms. Not funny at all.
NOPE. I just came to the conclusion that no matter what is going on, or who is in control, to some guy's it is ALWAYS the Democrats (or lefties) fault. I'm OK with that. Cause it won't change one thing.
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
That's your response? Seriously? You demanded a serious answer, and they provided well-research, documented answers. You don't like it so you stomp your foot and fold your arms. Not funny at all.
NOPE. I just came to the conclusion that no matter what is going on, or who is in control, to some guy's it is ALWAYS the Democrats (or lefties) fault. I'm OK with that. Cause it won't change one thing.
Nobody here has said all of our problems are the Democrats fault. It's just kind of childish when you make a false statement like
"In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems."
Then ask a question based on that false statement, and then ridicule people for giving you an honest and accurate responce. None of our statements said that "everything is the democrats fault" just that you are incorrect in your thinking that the Republicans have had more power over the past 50 or so years. This wasn't a personal attack or in anyway saying anything about who is to blame, simply that the Democrats have been in control much more than Republicans.
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
That's your response? Seriously? You demanded a serious answer, and they provided well-research, documented answers. You don't like it so you stomp your foot and fold your arms. Not funny at all.
NOPE. I just came to the conclusion that no matter what is going on, or who is in control, to some guy's it is ALWAYS the Democrats (or lefties) fault. I'm OK with that. Cause it won't change one thing.
Nobody here has said all of our problems are the Democrats fault. It's just kind of childish when you make a false statement like
"In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems."
Then ask a question based on that false statement, and then ridicule people for giving you an honest and accurate responce. None of our statements said that "everything is the democrats fault" just that you are incorrect in your thinking that the Republicans have had more power over the past 50 or so years. This wasn't a personal attack or in anyway saying anything about who is to blame, simply that the Democrats have been in control much more than Republicans.
Actually the question was why when the Republicans have been in power (I meant held the presidency) why isn't everything in the U.S. just the way you want it to be? However I learned that he who holds the office of President in the U.S., is not always the one in power at all. That always leaves room to blame someone else doesn't it? Very convenient. Like I said I am OK with that. I guess you guy's straightened me out and now I know better. Who mentioned an attack? I don't feel I am being attacked. I also stand by my statement that no matter what the issue, you guy's will ALWAYS figure out a way to blame it on those pesky lefties.
One more thing. I noticed when Kuzi posted that graph showing the "Real" tax rates for corporations in the U.S. verses other countries, that nobody asked the obvious. Is O'bama, the Democrats or even a Republican President now also responsible for the tax rates which are set by the individual states? I guess the only way to lower these high rates as far as everyone is concerned is that the Feds, should lower thier rates and that would fix the problem? Funny, you guy's aren't really looking for discussion, as you NEVER challenge anyone whom you consider is of like mind, ever. This is one of the major reasons these "discussions" turn into mud slinging. The rally cry of some here is "Never conceed a point", there is always some way to spin it instead.
I think it was gypsy who said, this sin't worth wasting one more brain cell on. This is TOO FUCKING FUNNY guy's.
That's your response? Seriously? You demanded a serious answer, and they provided well-research, documented answers. You don't like it so you stomp your foot and fold your arms. Not funny at all.
NOPE. I just came to the conclusion that no matter what is going on, or who is in control, to some guy's it is ALWAYS the Democrats (or lefties) fault. I'm OK with that. Cause it won't change one thing.
Nobody here has said all of our problems are the Democrats fault. It's just kind of childish when you make a false statement like
"In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems."
Then ask a question based on that false statement, and then ridicule people for giving you an honest and accurate responce. None of our statements said that "everything is the democrats fault" just that you are incorrect in your thinking that the Republicans have had more power over the past 50 or so years. This wasn't a personal attack or in anyway saying anything about who is to blame, simply that the Democrats have been in control much more than Republicans.
Actually the question was why when the Republicans have been in power (I meant held the presidency) why isn't everything in the U.S. just the way you want it to be? However I learned that he who holds the office of President in the U.S., is not always the one in power at all. That always leaves room to blame someone else doesn't it? Very convenient. Like I said I am OK with that. I guess you guy's straightened me out and now I know better. Who mentioned an attack? I don't feel I am being attacked. I also stand by my statement that no matter what the issue, you guy's will ALWAYS figure out a way to blame it on those pesky lefties.
One more thing. I noticed when Kuzi posted that graph showing the "Real" tax rates for corporations in the U.S. verses other countries, that nobody asked the obvious. Is O'bama, the Democrats or even a Republican President now also responsible for the tax rates which are set by the individual states? I guess the only way to lower these high rates as far as everyone is concerned is that the Feds, should lower thier rates and that would fix the problem? Funny, you guy's aren't really looking for discussion, as you NEVER challenge anyone whom you consider is of like mind, ever. This is one of the major reasons these "discussions" turn into mud slinging. The rally cry of some here is "Never conceed a point", there is always some way to spin it instead.
But you are still sadly mistaken in one HUGE point. I've never said the Republicans weren't to blame. They are! George Bush Jr. and Sr. Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter... As Presidents they all share some of the blame, as does the Republican Congress we had in the 90's and the Democrat congress we have had since then. No one party is to blame. The policies of both parties, which when it comes to spending have pretty much been the exact same, are to blame for this outrageous debt and financial meltdown.
PURO SAID...But you are still sadly mistaken in one HUGE point. I've never said the Republicans weren't to blame. They are! George Bush Jr. and Sr. Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter... As Presidents they all share some of the blame, as does the Republican Congress we had in the 90's and the Democrat congress we have had since then. No one party is to blame. The policies of both parties, which when it comes to spending have pretty much been the exact same, are to blame for this outrageous debt and financial meltdown.
At least we can both agree totally on this one Jason. I really believe that Politicians from ANY stripe are to blame for the utter failure of Domocracy, as it is practiced in both our countries. I also don't think this is an accident. There is a false rivalry built up between the parties to divide people and steer their focus from what is important to people, and I am talking here on a human level, as a species.
The animosity and resentments born out of differing political views serves this divide well, and is fed regularly by the political powers that be. If people would step back from ANY political affiliation and start to think with their own thoughts... think about the way things are in the world today, think about the state of the wordl which we are leaving to our children and grandchildren. Think about the waste of resourses, which are greedily used up in order to gain access to other resources, or more of the same resource. It's really crazy.
However that is a social question, and politicians are scared to death that people might start to consider these questions in a real serious way. Fighting between the differing "sides" of the political spectrum serves politics, and politicians only. We know that big business has a very strong representation in our political systems, for good or bad. We know that many politicians are, were or will be working for one big company or sector before or after their political career. IS this a conflict? In many, many cases the answer turns out to be YES. It is more of a moral question then a legal one. Politicians are good at legal questions and twisting the bounds of reason to something unrecognizable. Moral questions and decisions, ehh, not so much.
People are the group who are not represented in our systems of government. Oh sure , they will tell you that voting is the true sign of a democratic system. But let's face it, the day after you cast your vote, your voice is lost, and your concerns forgotten. You don't count because you are not important enough. That is the true story for the majority of people in both our country's, and argueing about who is right and who is wrong is really a waste of time. We are asking the wrong questions and allowing ourselves to be distracted by politicians and spin doctors who try to tell us what the message is, and therefore how the arguement will transpire.
I have said it before, (but like a lot of others here... you get drawn back in, right), that we will never change a single thing which is wrong in the world, in our country's or state/province, by what we argue about here on the forums.
PURO SAID...But you are still sadly mistaken in one HUGE point. I've never said the Republicans weren't to blame. They are! George Bush Jr. and Sr. Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter... As Presidents they all share some of the blame, as does the Republican Congress we had in the 90's and the Democrat congress we have had since then. No one party is to blame. The policies of both parties, which when it comes to spending have pretty much been the exact same, are to blame for this outrageous debt and financial meltdown.
At least we can both agree totally on this one Jason. I really believe that Politicians from ANY stripe are to blame for the utter failure of Domocracy, as it is practiced in both our countries. I also don't think this is an accident. There is a false rivalry built up between the parties to divide people and steer their focus from what is important to people, and I am talking here on a human level, as a species.
The animosity and resentments born out of differing political views serves this divide well, and is fed regularly by the political powers that be. If people would step back from ANY political affiliation and start to think with their own thoughts... think about the way things are in the world today, think about the state of the wordl which we are leaving to our children and grandchildren. Think about the waste of resourses, which are greedily used up in order to gain access to other resources, or more of the same resource. It's really crazy.
However that is a social question, and politicians are scared to death that people might start to consider these questions in a real serious way. Fighting between the differing "sides" of the political spectrum serves politics, and politicians only. We know that big business has a very strong representation in our political systems, for good or bad. We know that many politicians are, were or will be working for one big company or sector before or after their political career. IS this a conflict? In many, many cases the answer turns out to be YES. It is more of a moral question then a legal one. Politicians are good at legal questions and twisting the bounds of reason to something unrecognizable. Moral questions and decisions, ehh, not so much.
People are the group who are not represented in our systems of government. Oh sure , they will tell you that voting is the true sign of a democratic system. But let's face it, the day after you cast your vote, your voice is lost, and your concerns forgotten. You don't count because you are not important enough. That is the true story for the majority of people in both our country's, and argueing about who is right and who is wrong is really a waste of time. We are asking the wrong questions and allowing ourselves to be distracted by politicians and spin doctors who try to tell us what the message is, and therefore how the arguement will transpire.
I have said it before, (but like a lot of others here... you get drawn back in, right), that we will never change a single thing which is wrong in the world, in our country's or state/province, by what we argue about here on the forums.
I was somewhat with you up until the last line. Our debates, discussions, and sometimes all out battles here might not change the world, but they may open peoples minds enough to make them think and do a little research on their own without just believing what is spoonfed to them by the media, society, teachers, Hollywood, politicians, etc...etc... The more people think and actually care, the better place the world can be.
No one here----or at least very few of us, are open to changing our minds and not strictly looking for holes in the side of the point of view not agreed with or criticizing one sides "facts" with "facts" of their own. This can happen for a few people...not most posting here. There are not debates or discussions generally....its one side vs another side each saying why they are right and the other is wrong. Thats where any kind of mindedness ends.
see... this is EXACTLY the garbage im talking about. i asked someone to back something up ( a fair request in a debate) and i get cussed at. thanks.
If anyone would recongnize garbage Kuzi, I'm thinkin' it would be you. Kuzi, discussing things with you is like trying to hold a bowk of jello in your hands without the bowl. Just when you think you got it figured out, the sh!t runs all over the place. I can't count the number of times you have stated soemthing and then backed away from it when challenged. Did I say I believed it? Is one you have used many times. Why would you say something in a fashion which lends people to think that you are stating your beliefs only to back away from them? Perhaps you just can't allow yourself to be nailed down by your own words. You have constantly edited our posts, and when asked not to, have continued to. You have when doing this cutting job left out sections of posts, hacked them into parts which seem to make them say other things, or totally omitted parts that you didn't want to answer. You ask for proof, when some is provided you poo poo it. You don't discuss, or debate things half as well as YOU think you do. Nor do you do so with any integrity, or honesty. This is a joke... but it is NOT funny anymore. Try prcticing what you preach for a change.
interesting. in the original post that you quoted me here you quoted the line "for discussion purposes only" i didnt edit that in. if i did, your quote would not have shown that line. im not "backing off" of this one. i never edited this post. i dont edit after someone posts after me. it seem that you cant understand that someone would argue for the sake of arguing. i thought it was an interesting thought that was worth exploring. if you cant understand that or recognize that i wanted to discuss that thought, well again, i have nothing for you. you have clearly missed the point. and it is not worth discussing that. think what you will.
i dont curse. i dont insult. i dont use sarcasm as a second language. i take what you say on face value because in a forum situation it it is unwise to do anything else.
but in return i constantly have to edit and re-edit as i re-read my posts because i am afraid that i will be accused (as in this case) of offending you or someone else. when i stand up for myself you call me out on it but when you stand up for your self i am expected roll over and submit (and i have on many times) that i am wrong.
as for "integrity" and "honesty" ... there are many sources on the internet. many of them i have linked to. what usually happens is i make a post with a link and someone will say that it is a half truth (im guessing this is the honesty part you are talking about) then i will ask them for a link or a reference or to back their claim up. i am usually responded to with a sarcastic post about how horrible of a person i am or how im stupid or how my link is a "conservative" site. there is no reference to back up the counter claim, just attacks. this is still better than many people with opposing views. i am not claiming to be a guru on politics. im not saying i have it all figured out. im not even saying im the best "arguer" here. but this is actually why i like to debate. it helps me fix and change my views. it helps me grow and learn more. im not saying that i am a master of arguing. im just a guy that enjoys discussing politics, even if it isnt a view that i share.
but thank you, laker, for showing your true colors about what you think of me. i never looked down on you or your opinions. i actually liked discussing things with you. im sorry i misplaced my friendship with you.
EDIT (the only one): if you want to discuss this further laker i am still open to it. however i dont want to do it on the open forum. any differences we may have and want to work out dont need to cause further strife in the forum. please PM me if you feel the need.
Lol----Dont do it Doug, ITS A TRAP!!!! Youll leave the conversation with a Gingrich Hat and Sarah Palin bumper sticker!!!
im actually not a big fan of either. ... and way to think the worst of people. besides, this is a conversation between laker and myself. i can include you and copy and paste what i sent him if you would like but i dont feel that it is a discussion for the open forum. ...at least at this time
Its a joke Kuzi...a joke (mostly), ok? Relax bro---getting too tense here, its Thursday, we can all drink very soon.
I just made my reply and then had to go to work, so never stayed around to read anything after that. Now I am kind of glad it worked out that way. This was too funny, and I would not have been able to help myself. I am sure Kuzi knew you were joking, it's just that with everything that was going on right at that time he was in no mood to see the humor. On another note, I'm not much of a drinker (hardly ever )... that's why I have so much pent up anger
Its a joke Kuzi...a joke (mostly), ok? Relax bro---getting too tense here, its Thursday, we can all drink very soon.
I just made my reply and then had to go to work, so never stayed around to read anything after that. Now I am kind of glad it worked out that way. This was too funny, and I would not have been able to help myself. I am sure Kuzi knew you were joking, it's just that with everything that was going on right at that time he was in no mood to see the humor. On another note, I'm not much of a drinker (hardly ever )... that's why I have so much pent up anger
Drink more ya damn angry liberal! lol Just kidding bro. Come on down to TX, I just got a brand new bottle of rum!
Its a joke Kuzi...a joke (mostly), ok? Relax bro---getting too tense here, its Thursday, we can all drink very soon.
I just made my reply and then had to go to work, so never stayed around to read anything after that. Now I am kind of glad it worked out that way. This was too funny, and I would not have been able to help myself. I am sure Kuzi knew you were joking, it's just that with everything that was going on right at that time he was in no mood to see the humor. On another note, I'm not much of a drinker (hardly ever )... that's why I have so much pent up anger
Drink more ya damn angry liberal! lol Just kidding bro. Come on down to TX, I just got a brand new bottle of rum!
That's funny, cause when I do drink it is usually Rum or Tequila.
Its a joke Kuzi...a joke (mostly), ok? Relax bro---getting too tense here, its Thursday, we can all drink very soon.
I just made my reply and then had to go to work, so never stayed around to read anything after that. Now I am kind of glad it worked out that way. This was too funny, and I would not have been able to help myself. I am sure Kuzi knew you were joking, it's just that with everything that was going on right at that time he was in no mood to see the humor. On another note, I'm not much of a drinker (hardly ever )... that's why I have so much pent up anger
Drink more ya damn angry liberal! lol Just kidding bro. Come on down to TX, I just got a brand new bottle of rum!
That's funny, cause when I do drink it is usually Rum or Tequila.
I got a bottle of Pyrat XO Reserve. Haven't ever tried it, but heard great things about it. Made by the same people who make Patron.
PURO SAID...But you are still sadly mistaken in one HUGE point. I've never said the Republicans weren't to blame. They are! George Bush Jr. and Sr. Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter... As Presidents they all share some of the blame, as does the Republican Congress we had in the 90's and the Democrat congress we have had since then. No one party is to blame. The policies of both parties, which when it comes to spending have pretty much been the exact same, are to blame for this outrageous debt and financial meltdown.
At least we can both agree totally on this one Jason. I really believe that Politicians from ANY stripe are to blame for the utter failure of Domocracy, as it is practiced in both our countries. I also don't think this is an accident. There is a false rivalry built up between the parties to divide people and steer their focus from what is important to people, and I am talking here on a human level, as a species.
The animosity and resentments born out of differing political views serves this divide well, and is fed regularly by the political powers that be. If people would step back from ANY political affiliation and start to think with their own thoughts... think about the way things are in the world today, think about the state of the wordl which we are leaving to our children and grandchildren. Think about the waste of resourses, which are greedily used up in order to gain access to other resources, or more of the same resource. It's really crazy.
However that is a social question, and politicians are scared to death that people might start to consider these questions in a real serious way. Fighting between the differing "sides" of the political spectrum serves politics, and politicians only. We know that big business has a very strong representation in our political systems, for good or bad. We know that many politicians are, were or will be working for one big company or sector before or after their political career. IS this a conflict? In many, many cases the answer turns out to be YES. It is more of a moral question then a legal one. Politicians are good at legal questions and twisting the bounds of reason to something unrecognizable. Moral questions and decisions, ehh, not so much.
People are the group who are not represented in our systems of government. Oh sure , they will tell you that voting is the true sign of a democratic system. But let's face it, the day after you cast your vote, your voice is lost, and your concerns forgotten. You don't count because you are not important enough. That is the true story for the majority of people in both our country's, and argueing about who is right and who is wrong is really a waste of time. We are asking the wrong questions and allowing ourselves to be distracted by politicians and spin doctors who try to tell us what the message is, and therefore how the arguement will transpire.
I have said it before, (but like a lot of others here... you get drawn back in, right), that we will never change a single thing which is wrong in the world, in our country's or state/province, by what we argue about here on the forums.
I was somewhat with you up until the last line. Our debates, discussions, and sometimes all out battles here might not change the world, but they may open peoples minds enough to make them think and do a little research on their own without just believing what is spoonfed to them by the media, society, teachers, Hollywood, politicians, etc...etc... The more people think and actually care, the better place the world can be.
Now this is interesting. Common ground! I find Puro and myself in agreement, and he was nearly in agreement with Laker, (until the last paragraph). I think this is illustrative of American society. Unity in diversity. Puro looks at what's happening on the Left, and sees (correctly) that left unchecked progress in this direction leads to an authoratarian society, government in power over every aspect of our lives. Laker looks at the right, and recognizes (correctly, in my opinion) that the uber-rich in our society would love for our work force to be competitive on a global scale, by making us as poor as the peasants they're hiring elsewhere, accomplished by sending our jobs and wealth overseas. Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right...
Whats the next line Kreig...."The public be damned" or "Let them eat cake"?
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.
Comments
Since 1945 there have been 18 2-year terms where Democrats controlled both House and Senate
11 of those terms they also had a Democrat President.
Since 1945 there have been 6 2-year terms where Republicans controlled both House and Senate
2 of those terms they also had a Republican President.
Who has held control the most in the last 60+ years?
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm
"In the last 50 years the Republicans have been in power much more and longer then the Dems."
Then ask a question based on that false statement, and then ridicule people for giving you an honest and accurate responce. None of our statements said that "everything is the democrats fault" just that you are incorrect in your thinking that the Republicans have had more power over the past 50 or so years. This wasn't a personal attack or in anyway saying anything about who is to blame, simply that the Democrats have been in control much more than Republicans.
One more thing. I noticed when Kuzi posted that graph showing the "Real" tax rates for corporations in the U.S. verses other countries, that nobody asked the obvious. Is O'bama, the Democrats or even a Republican President now also responsible for the tax rates which are set by the individual states? I guess the only way to lower these high rates as far as everyone is concerned is that the Feds, should lower thier rates and that would fix the problem? Funny, you guy's aren't really looking for discussion, as you NEVER challenge anyone whom you consider is of like mind, ever. This is one of the major reasons these "discussions" turn into mud slinging. The rally cry of some here is "Never conceed a point", there is always some way to spin it instead.
At least we can both agree totally on this one Jason. I really believe that Politicians from ANY stripe are to blame for the utter failure of Domocracy, as it is practiced in both our countries. I also don't think this is an accident. There is a false rivalry built up between the parties to divide people and steer their focus from what is important to people, and I am talking here on a human level, as a species.
The animosity and resentments born out of differing political views serves this divide well, and is fed regularly by the political powers that be. If people would step back from ANY political affiliation and start to think with their own thoughts... think about the way things are in the world today, think about the state of the wordl which we are leaving to our children and grandchildren. Think about the waste of resourses, which are greedily used up in order to gain access to other resources, or more of the same resource. It's really crazy.
However that is a social question, and politicians are scared to death that people might start to consider these questions in a real serious way. Fighting between the differing "sides" of the political spectrum serves politics, and politicians only. We know that big business has a very strong representation in our political systems, for good or bad. We know that many politicians are, were or will be working for one big company or sector before or after their political career. IS this a conflict? In many, many cases the answer turns out to be YES. It is more of a moral question then a legal one. Politicians are good at legal questions and twisting the bounds of reason to something unrecognizable. Moral questions and decisions, ehh, not so much.
People are the group who are not represented in our systems of government. Oh sure , they will tell you that voting is the true sign of a democratic system. But let's face it, the day after you cast your vote, your voice is lost, and your concerns forgotten. You don't count because you are not important enough. That is the true story for the majority of people in both our country's, and argueing about who is right and who is wrong is really a waste of time. We are asking the wrong questions and allowing ourselves to be distracted by politicians and spin doctors who try to tell us what the message is, and therefore how the arguement will transpire.
I have said it before, (but like a lot of others here... you get drawn back in, right), that we will never change a single thing which is wrong in the world, in our country's or state/province, by what we argue about here on the forums.
it seem that you cant understand that someone would argue for the sake of arguing. i thought it was an interesting thought that was worth exploring. if you cant understand that or recognize that i wanted to discuss that thought, well again, i have nothing for you. you have clearly missed the point. and it is not worth discussing that. think what you will.
i dont curse. i dont insult. i dont use sarcasm as a second language. i take what you say on face value because in a forum situation it it is unwise to do anything else.
but in return i constantly have to edit and re-edit as i re-read my posts because i am afraid that i will be accused (as in this case) of offending you or someone else. when i stand up for myself you call me out on it but when you stand up for your self i am expected roll over and submit (and i have on many times) that i am wrong.
as for "integrity" and "honesty" ...
there are many sources on the internet. many of them i have linked to. what usually happens is i make a post with a link and someone will say that it is a half truth (im guessing this is the honesty part you are talking about) then i will ask them for a link or a reference or to back their claim up. i am usually responded to with a sarcastic post about how horrible of a person i am or how im stupid or how my link is a "conservative" site. there is no reference to back up the counter claim, just attacks. this is still better than many people with opposing views.
i am not claiming to be a guru on politics. im not saying i have it all figured out. im not even saying im the best "arguer" here. but this is actually why i like to debate. it helps me fix and change my views. it helps me grow and learn more. im not saying that i am a master of arguing. im just a guy that enjoys discussing politics, even if it isnt a view that i share.
but thank you, laker, for showing your true colors about what you think of me. i never looked down on you or your opinions. i actually liked discussing things with you. im sorry i misplaced my friendship with you.
EDIT (the only one): if you want to discuss this further laker i am still open to it. however i dont want to do it on the open forum. any differences we may have and want to work out dont need to cause further strife in the forum. please PM me if you feel the need.
pm sent.
... and way to think the worst of people.
besides, this is a conversation between laker and myself. i can include you and copy and paste what i sent him if you would like but i dont feel that it is a discussion for the open forum.
...at least at this time
On another note, I'm not much of a drinker (hardly ever )... that's why I have so much pent up anger
Puro looks at what's happening on the Left, and sees (correctly) that left unchecked progress in this direction leads to an authoratarian society, government in power over every aspect of our lives. Laker looks at the right, and recognizes (correctly, in my opinion) that the uber-rich in our society would love for our work force to be competitive on a global scale, by making us as poor as the peasants they're hiring elsewhere, accomplished by sending our jobs and wealth overseas. Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right...