Obama 4 more years

[~Rocktar~]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIA5aszzA18


And it begins

[waywardgs]

Heh, I got a kick out of the "we will not rest!" chants while flashing pictures of him playing golf.

[Tsa`ah]

So, after tea baggers destroying their own credibility in congress, GOP efforts to bust unions ... essentially cutting their own throats ... who, in the GOP, is going to take Obama down in 2012?

[Tgo01]

So, after tea baggers destroying their own credibility in congress, GOP efforts to bust unions ... essentially cutting their own throats ... who, in the GOP, is going to take Obama down in 2012?

Pretty sad when presidential candidates don't have to be good anymore, they just don't have to be as bad as 'the other guy.'

[Tsa`ah]

Pretty sad when presidential candidates don't have to be good anymore, they just don't have to be as bad as 'the other guy.'

That doesn't really answer the question, so let me put it into your terms.

Who does the GOP have that isn't "as bad" as Obama?

[Tgo01]

That doesn't really answer the question, so let me put it into your terms.

I didn't answer your question because how in the world would I know who is going to run against Obama in 2012?

[Tsa`ah]

Oh come on ... everyone already knows at least half the field.

Newt, Mitt, Sarah, Michelle, Mike, and Tim.

You can throw any other name in there you would like ... but it doesn't matter. If it's a GOP congressional member, they're going down strictly because of their vote during the current session vs campaign promises. If it's a governor ... chances are they'll be associated with union busting efforts.

The simple point is that the GOP doesn't have anyone that isn't "as bad" as Obama. It is clearly a field of "much worse". Never mind that most of the criticism of Obama is opinion based ... not fact based.

[TheEschaton]

Michelle Bachman is batshit crazy. That she's a representative in the House makes me sick.

[Tgo01]

You can throw any other name in there you would like ... but it doesn't matter.

So rather than trying to refute anything bad being sad about Obama or pointing out any of his good qualities you just claim that no GOP will have a chance to beat him because they are worse than Obama.

[Tsa`ah]

So rather than trying to refute anything bad being sad about Obama or pointing out any of his good qualities you just claim that no GOP will have a chance to beat him because they are worse than Obama.

You clearly didn't read what followed.

[Tgo01]

You clearly didn't read what followed.


Newt, Mitt, Sarah, Michelle, Mike, and Tim.

You can throw any other name in there you would like ... but it doesn't matter. If it's a GOP congressional member, they're going down strictly because of their vote during the current session vs campaign promises. If it's a governor ... chances are they'll be associated with union busting efforts.

The simple point is that the GOP doesn't have anyone that isn't "as bad" as Obama. It is clearly a field of "much worse".

No...that's all pretty much "Any GOP candidate is worse than Obama."


Never mind that most of the criticism of Obama is opinion based ... not fact based.

Oh this?

Most criticism of Republican candidates are opinion based ... not fact based.

Your turn.

[waywardgs]

Pretty sad when presidential candidates don't have to be good anymore, they just don't have to be as bad as 'the other guy.'

When was the last time this wasn't the case?

[Tgo01]

When was the last time this wasn't the case?

In my opinion? Clinton.

[Tsa`ah]

Most criticism of GOP candidates is opinion based? Never mind that you tossed an opinion out that had not factual backing.

Newt didn't do a flip flop on Libya in order to counter what Obama is doing? He didn't launch the impeachment of Clinton and investigate blow jobs while he was having an affair?

Mitt Romney did not pass an identical health care bill into law while he was governor ... and now is not one of leading critics of said reform. I'd almost consider his "illegal" landscapers to be a non issue ... if he didn't use the same company on both counts.

Sarah and Michelle ... I don't see the point in delving into that particular pot of horror (on all levels).

Huck beating the "birther drum", while getting his historical points completely wrong ... all while denying he was beating it. Never mind his clemency issues and other various foot in mouth moments regarding young actresses.

Pawlenty .... other than his years as a board member a telecom that ripped off customers, pardoning a child molester while allegations of ongoing rape were raised by the man's daughter were coming to light ... and of course the havoc he wrecked on the fine folks of Minnesota with back door taxes.

[Tgo01]

So rather than trying to refute anything bad being sad about Obama or pointing out any of his good qualities you just claim that no GOP will have a chance to beat him because they are worse than Obama.

.

[Tsa`ah]

You seem to forget that this is your tangent.

[Parkbandit]

Oh come on ... everyone already knows at least half the field.

Newt, Mitt, Sarah, Michelle, Mike, and Tim.


Anyone of them would be better than Obama has been in the past 3 years.

You can also include Ron Pau and Donald Trump, who would be some of my least favorite people to run.. and they would still be a far superior choice than Obama.

[Parkbandit]

You seem to forget that this is your tangent.

Really? Go back and look. It's your tangent, Shit4Brains. No one brought up the GOP before you did... and Tgo01 didn't even post prior to you.

[Tsa`ah]

You need help beyond what anyone here is capable of offering.

[Parkbandit]

You need help beyond what anyone here is capable of offering.

Derp, derp, Shit4Brains... derp, derp.

[Parkbandit]

When was the last time this wasn't the case?

Reagan/Mondale

[Tsa`ah]

At this point you're not doing yourself any favors by continuing to post ... were you half as intelligent you would like us to believe ... you would just walk away.

[Parkbandit]

At this point you're not doing yourself any favors by continuing to post ... were you half as intelligent you would like us to believe ... you would just walk away.

This was your tangent.

[waywardgs]

Anyone of them would be better than Obama has been in the past 3 years.

You can also include Ron Pau and Donald Trump, who would be some of my least favorite people to run.. and they would still be a far superior choice than Obama.

Even Michelle? really?

[Androidpk]

Ron Paul will be getting my vote.

[Jarvan]

Oh come on ... everyone already knows at least half the field.

Newt, Mitt, Sarah, Michelle, Mike, and Tim.

You can throw any other name in there you would like ... but it doesn't matter. If it's a GOP congressional member, they're going down strictly because of their vote during the current session vs campaign promises. If it's a governor ... chances are they'll be associated with union busting efforts.

The simple point is that the GOP doesn't have anyone that isn't "as bad" as Obama. It is clearly a field of "much worse". Never mind that most of the criticism of Obama is opinion based ... not fact based.

LOTS of facts in there all right. I'd say that pretty much everything you have said is opinion too.

[Parkbandit]

Even Michelle? really?

I don't know much about Michelle Bachmann to be honest... but yes, even she could do a better job in the WH than a 2nd term of Obama.

[Parkbandit]

Ron Paul will be getting my vote.

He's raising money like he's running again, that's for sure.

[Parkbandit]

LOTS of facts in there all right. I'd say that pretty much everything you have said is opinion too.

In Shit4Brain's defense, you missed his indepth fact list:


Most criticism of GOP candidates is opinion based? Never mind that you tossed an opinion out that had not factual backing.

Newt didn't do a flip flop on Libya in order to counter what Obama is doing? He didn't launch the impeachment of Clinton and investigate blow jobs while he was having an affair?

Mitt Romney did not pass an identical health care bill into law while he was governor ... and now is not one of leading critics of said reform. I'd almost consider his "illegal" landscapers to be a non issue ... if he didn't use the same company on both counts.

Sarah and Michelle ... I don't see the point in delving into that particular pot of horror (on all levels).

Huck beating the "birther drum", while getting his historical points completely wrong ... all while denying he was beating it. Never mind his clemency issues and other various foot in mouth moments regarding young actresses.

Pawlenty .... other than his years as a board member a telecom that ripped off customers, pardoning a child molester while allegations of ongoing rape were raised by the man's daughter were coming to light ... and of course the havoc he wrecked on the fine folks of Minnesota with back door taxes.

[crb]

So, after tea baggers destroying their own credibility in congress, GOP efforts to bust unions ... essentially cutting their own throats ... who, in the GOP, is going to take Obama down in 2012?

Newsflash liberal ass. Unions are not popular. I live in Lansing Michigan, state capital so we have a ton of public employees, home of MSU, so we have a lot of naive college democrats and all the unionized teachers, home to GM plants and various suppliers, so we have the UAW. Every time a local group goes on strike (or threatens), the local news ends up doing a poll, and it is a landslide of people who side against the union. Even here.

Unions are rich (sickeningly so), so they matter politically because of that, but the public doesn't favor them. You may be confused by the vocal minority throwing temper tantrums like some 16 year old girl because Daddy is cutting up her credit card. But the vast unvocal middle of the country does not like unions, and GOP busting of them is not going to hurt them in any election.

In fact, a campaign ad saying "so and so took on the public employee unions." Is going to play very well.

[crb]

Oh... that video is funny. Nice to see the NRSC going at him. Obama has made so many bullshit promises that the campaign ads more or less write themselves.

He was elected because of antibush sentiment and the fact that he had so little experience he could make lofty speaches and claim policy positions and you couldn't call him on the bullshit since his record was so thin.

Now... he has a record, and it is fucking hilarious. Bush Sr. just had that one "no new taxes" flip. Obama has flips all over the fucking place. Spending, the deficit, wars, guatanamo, patriot act, transparency, lobbying, etc etc.

[Back]

Meh. Republicans are too not-funny to ever pull off satire like real satirists can.

[crb]

They're libertarian, not Republican, but pretty close. See Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

[Warriorbird]

Realistically the country is equally stratified to 2008. It will be a close race. I do think Tsa'ah has a point though, in that many of the "known quantities" Republicans should step aside to allow some of the less known and more valid candidates (Jon Huntsman, for instance) to get more of the spotlight if they want to win this.

[Tsa`ah]

Newsflash liberal ass.

Didn't take you long to jump in with your pie hole all frothed up did it?


Unions are not popular.

With conservatives of course.

The current polling shows that these union busting attempts are very unpopular ... additional polling has shown the the general public supports the right to collective bargaining. Not to mention the massive pro-union crowd that showed up in Madison WI (which included farmers) and the recall effort and polls (which have shown that 3 state GOP senators would lose in a recall against a generic dem ... 3 being the number needed for Dems to retake the majority ... and more than a couple barely holding on to office against a generic Dem).

Oh, and let's not forget Walker's inevitable short term as the WI governor. His approval numbers tanked and he's not doing very good in polls against a generic Dem either.

The rest of your drivel isn't worth responding to. It's nothing more than anecdotal BS piled on top of poorly educated talking points.


Obama 4 more years 04-02-2011 10:35 PM and you keep sucking on obummer's tit hoping for free money....fuck off

Oh look, another attention whore afraid of attention.

[Parkbandit]

Didn't take you long to jump in with your pie hole all frothed up did it?



Far more time than it took you, to be honest:



The simple point is that the GOP doesn't have anyone that isn't "as bad" as Obama. It is clearly a field of "much worse". Never mind that most of the criticism of Obama is opinion based ... not fact based.

[Tsa`ah]

Far more time than it took you, to be honest:


And you keep providing examples of your sub-standard comprehension skills. Be it you, the cry baby ... or any number of other inbreds ... the MO is the same, lead with the insults in hopes that the rest of your tripe isn't scrutinized.

[Tgo01]

The current polling shows that these union busting attempts are very unpopular ... additional polling has shown the the general public supports the right to collective bargaining. Not to mention the massive pro-union crowd that showed up in Madison WI (which included farmers) and the recall effort and polls (which have shown that 3 state GOP senators would lose in a recall against a generic dem ... 3 being the number needed for Dems to retake the majority ... and more than a couple barely holding on to office against a generic Dem).

Oh, and let's not forget Walker's inevitable short term as the WI governor. His approval numbers tanked and he's not doing very good in polls against a generic Dem either.


The rest of your drivel isn't worth responding to. It's nothing more than anecdotal BS piled on top of poorly educated talking points.

Are you serious?

[Parkbandit]

And you keep providing examples of your sub-standard comprehension skills. Be it you, the cry baby ... or any number of other inbreds ... the MO is the same, lead with the insults in hopes that the rest of your tripe isn't scrutinized.

What tripe? Do you mean like the "facts" you have laid out thus far in this thread? Like Michelle and Sarah being "whores" in more than one way?

Yes, yes.... those certainly are well thought out and founded "facts"...

Seriously, Shit4Brains, you are making political threads fun again. Please, please continue. Your delusional stupidity is, sadly, not as rare as it used to be, but still quite entertaining.

[4a6c1]

Meh. I dont know. I'm okay with Obama for another four years. DADT changed my mind about him and solidly put him in the "People who do and not just say" category.

There are some things he is doing that I dont like and I will vote for anyone that comes along who can promise at least 60 percent of these.

I would rather he pulled out of Libya, Iraq and halved the rest of the international operations. I would like to see our entire international military profile redeveloped to reflect a worldwide "support and defend" perspective instead of our current leader role. I think weapons developmet and invention should halt entirely for at least the next decade. We should use that money to rebuild our programs at home for veterans, women, children and the unemployment sector. High speed rails. Everywhere to put veterans to work and give needed combat-to-civilian on the job training. An increase in the mental health programs that we offer to the disabled, veterans, prisoners and at risk minorities.

COMPLETE Restructure of the education system to include the irradication of unions and tenure (among other things) and the forced involvement of parents in the classroom. Current technology should make this easy as pie. Spanish language requirement in all schools. Longer school days. Less weekends. Several hours of homework a night requirement for passing anything with remote verification of parents AND child.

The government should be working with top innovator companies to establish jobs at home. Apple, IBM, Lanxess, Bayer, Amazon, Google, Siemens, That electric producter (123 whatever). Grants for scientists, engineers, inventors, enterpreneurs. Tax cuts for those with a certain amount of viable patents per month. Higher taxes for corporations that do not invent or create jobs much less meet the patent quota and certainly for ones that take manufacturing off our soil. Less rights for corporations and clearly defined parameters of operating that ban all political involvement. Forever. (Gilded age anyone?)

Also more vagina. Make Hillary Clinton a permenent advisor to the president. And Michelle Bachman. Make her go back to whatever alien solar system she is visiting from.

[Geijon Khyree]

Good Points Rojo.

With that said. Libya, we're using this as a testing grounds for shining star leader to a more covert we're still the leader. Regardless we can't really change our world profile militarily. We're far and away the military presence everyone emulates and it isn't really feasible. Obama has lost Hillary Clinton because he didn't go balls deep into Libya even when France and several other nations were perplexed by our hesitation.

Education does need reform. Spanish as a required language will never happen. This seems to be a drill down from government direction of inclusion into society, but the motto of America is that everyone is an immigrant, yet you need to eventually assimilate. The Italians, Germans, Hungarians, Russian, etc all have done so. It's Mexicans and Latin/Spanish speakers and some Asian cultures who tend to not do so.

Do we need to have a wider view because speaking multiple languages is more common in Europe, yes we do, but it has to be encouraged. I'd like to know if such requirements are common in European nations because I'm skeptical spanish is required in any of them. I'd prefer to speak Italian or French myself.

I like your third point. Obama tends to do what he says. At his State of the Union they rated him on the promises he made the year before and he had accomplished 18 out of the 22. Obama's record is outstanding and he's still repairing problems from Bush.

I notice nobody has presented a Republican who can go against him and people really have not presented valid arguments that Obama has performed poorly. Iraq is now an afterthought, Afghanistan seems to be quieting besides it's horrible leadership and corruption, and Libya shouldn't last long.

[Tgo01]

It incests people that we offer Spanish as certain default options unless you press 1.

I chuckled.

[Geijon Khyree]

Whoops.

[Parkbandit]

\I like your third point. Obama tends to do what he says. At his State of the Union they rated him on the promises he made the year before and he had accomplished 18 out of the 22. Obama's record is outstanding and he's still repairing problems from Bush.


Lulz... who is "they"? MSNBC? NY Times? St. Petersburg Times?

[Cephalopod]

Meh. I dont know. I'm okay with Obama for another four years. DADT changed my mind about him and solidly put him in the "People who do and not just say" category.


As always, I'm not paying attention to this thread 'cause it's the weekend... but this caught my attention. Obama's severe sluggishness on DADT is what started solidifying my disappointment in him. I can't forgive the betrayed promises in the first two years that preceded the final end of DADT.

I will probably grudgingly vote for him again because there is no good alternative, but Obama is someone who could have done amazing things in office... and in my mind, broke promises to his base and has squandered his incoming momentum.



Also more vagina. Make Hillary Clinton a permenent advisor to the president. And Michelle Bachman. Make her go back to whatever alien solar system she is visiting from.

You know, I feel bad for not being supportive of Clinton when she was in the primaries. I just didn't think she was as electable as Obama. Looking back, I feel she would have done a far better job than Obama has. Also, concur on Bachmann.

[Jarvan]

Meh. I dont know. I'm okay with Obama for another four years. DADT changed my mind about him and solidly put him in the "People who do and not just say" category.

There are some things he is doing that I dont like and I will vote for anyone that comes along who can promise at least 60 percent of these.

I would rather he pulled out of Libya, Iraq and halved the rest of the international operations. I would like to see our entire international military profile redeveloped to reflect a worldwide "support and defend" perspective instead of our current leader role. I think weapons developmet and invention should halt entirely for at least the next decade. We should use that money to rebuild our programs at home for veterans, women, children and the unemployment sector. High speed rails. Everywhere to put veterans to work and give needed combat-to-civilian on the job training. An increase in the mental health programs that we offer to the disabled, veterans, prisoners and at risk minorities.

COMPLETE Restructure of the education system to include the irradication of unions and tenure (among other things) and the forced involvement of parents in the classroom. Current technology should make this easy as pie. Spanish language requirement in all schools. Longer school days. Less weekends. Several hours of homework a night requirement for passing anything with remote verification of parents AND child.

The government should be working with top innovator companies to establish jobs at home. Apple, IBM, Lanxess, Bayer, Amazon, Google, Siemens, That electric producter (123 whatever). Grants for scientists, engineers, inventors, enterpreneurs. Tax cuts for those with a certain amount of viable patents per month. Higher taxes for corporations that do not invent or create jobs much less meet the patent quota and certainly for ones that take manufacturing off our soil. Less rights for corporations and clearly defined parameters of operating that ban all political involvement. Forever. (Gilded age anyone?)

Also more vagina. Make Hillary Clinton a permenent advisor to the president. And Michelle Bachman. Make her go back to whatever alien solar system she is visiting from.

You know.. I had this long post I was going to do in response to this, then I realized, it doesn't matter. No such thing as a good political discussion between two dissenting ideas. Either both sides feel they are right and the other is an idiot, or one side does. Which really, makes at least one side the true idiot.


I am going to say, the day the Government requires any kid I have, or myself, learn Spanish. Is the day I hope this country gets hit with an asteroid the size of Texas. It's funny, when I was in Europe every country I went to, the people were like, Oh your American, let me practice my English. never had any of them ask if I knew Spanish. My ancestors came here and had to learn English - German and Russian- so why don't they?

[Warriorbird]

In Rojo's defense... unless they're French they probably all speak 2-4 languages. I like some of her ideas quite a lot though I think her education ideas are a bit over optimistic. I'm not sure her "involve parents" idea really correlates terribly well with A. the entitlement culture and B. the large number of parents who aren't actually allowed ON school grounds for instance.

[Jarvan]

In Rojo's defense... unless they're French they probably all speak 2-4 languages.

yes, most of my friends there do. I sometimes feel stupid for only knowing 2. That being said, doesn't mean I should be forced to learn a language I deem as immaterial. And that is my opinion and I am entitled to it before anyone freaks on me.

I'd much rather the schools teach Chinese at this point rather then Spanish French and German.


btw.. just read this and had to laugh.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/02/obama.re.election.launch/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Not going to Quote it all.. but this part made me laugh..

Obama's team has been asking campaign bundlers to raise $350,000 each, no easy task since campaign finance laws limit gifts to $2,500 per donor. Two sources tell CNN the campaign team hopes that in total their bundlers will raise $500 million, leaving the campaign to raise another $500 million and amass a record-breaking $1 billion war chest.

So his people want to take at least 1 billion out of people's pockets to get him re-elected. Frankly, this election crap has gone way overboard. What ever happened to just getting on tv, saying your message, and having a debate or two. Now, you have to travel to each state multiple times, have people knock on your door and see an add every other commercial. Negative attack adds suck. I hate when ANY party does them. Tell me who you are and what your position on key items is, speak the truth, be firm, and don't flip flop later. That's all we need to elect someone.

The second the other party, whomever it is, starts crying he's lying or, he did this! it just makes them look stupid.

[Warriorbird]

yes, most of my friends there do. I sometimes feel stupid for only knowing 2. That being said, doesn't mean I should be forced to learn a language I deem as immaterial. And that is my opinion and I am entitled to it before anyone freaks on me.

I'd much rather the schools teach Chinese at this point rather then Spanish French and German.


btw.. just read this and had to laugh.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/02/obama.re.election.launch/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Not going to Quote it all.. but this part made me laugh..

Obama's team has been asking campaign bundlers to raise $350,000 each, no easy task since campaign finance laws limit gifts to $2,500 per donor. Two sources tell CNN the campaign team hopes that in total their bundlers will raise $500 million, leaving the campaign to raise another $500 million and amass a record-breaking $1 billion war chest.

So his people want to take at least 1 billion out of people's pockets to get him re-elected. Frankly, this election crap has gone way overboard. What ever happened to just getting on tv, saying your message, and having a debate or two. Now, you have to travel to each state multiple times, have people knock on your door and see an add every other commercial. Negative attack adds suck. I hate when ANY party does them. Tell me who you are and what your position on key items is, speak the truth, be firm, and don't flip flop later. That's all we need to elect someone.

The second the other party, whomever it is, starts crying he's lying or, he did this! it just makes them look stupid.

It'll get worse. The Supreme Court enabled open season on ridiculous campaign spending by corporations and unions.

[Jarvan]

It'll get worse. The Supreme Court enabled open season on ridiculous campaign spending by corporations and unions.

true.. though in a sense. Corporations spend their own money, Unions spend their members money.

[4a6c1]

You know.. I had this long post I was going to do in response to this, then I realized, it doesn't matter. No such thing as a good political discussion between two dissenting ideas. Either both sides feel they are right and the other is an idiot, or one side does. Which really, makes at least one side the true idiot.


Dissenting opinions are actually a good thing. And I cannot agree that a mere disagreement proves the idiocy of one side. In a productive decision making process - within any command structure mechanism - there should be at least several different ideas from which a central compromise is reached. But I am very happy for you that you were abe to contain your emotions. :D

Your irrational nationalism pertaining to language not withstanding, my comment about a Spanish requirement in schools was more in reference to the incredibly large, and actually quite conspicuous Spanish speaking continent below us. Idealy I wish all Americans spoke English, Spanish and French. It just makes sense considering our neighbors.

.

WB. You are bias, but the education system is trash. There is no accountability. For anyone. What do you think it would take? I think only drastic measures like complete restructure on the federal level would fix that mess.

[Warriorbird]

true.. though in a sense. Corporations spend their own money, Unions spend their members money.

Who's effort did the corporations get the money from? Their workers' effort.

And, oh reddest of red discos, the Republican Party at this point is not about to seriously undertake anything that involves "Federal" and education in the same sentence. This leaves Democrats, and our dear friends at the Supreme Court actually decided to super empower unions, so I don't see it happening, me biased or no.

I'd love to see something that increased parental involvement. I'm just not sure most parents care about their kid's education as much as you do.

[4a6c1]

I'm just not sure most parents care about their kid's education as much as you do.

Sounds like a national problem that could eventually ruin our standing in the worlds economy. Oh wait.

[Warriorbird]

Sounds like a national problem that could eventually ruin our standing in the worlds economy. Oh wait.

You called it. While I think at times the problem is overstated, the willingness to actually innovate isn't there. We've had mostly the same policy for the last three Presidents.

[4a6c1]

Yes.

[Tgo01]

Who's effort did the corporations get the money from? Their workers' effort.

That's kind of stretching things a bit there. That's like saying if I donate to a campaign my company actually donated the money because they write my paycheck.

[Latrinsorm]

This seems to be a drill down from government direction of inclusion into society, but the motto of America is that everyone is an immigrant, yet you need to eventually assimilate. The Italians, Germans, Hungarians, Russian, etc all have done so. It's Mexicans and Latin/Spanish speakers and some Asian cultures who tend to not do so. I disagree - there's no Little Germany, but there are Little Italies everywhere. Hence, what we obviously need to do is invade Mexico, Latinia, and Spain a couple times, that way their respective immigrant populations will know they need to get with the program.

[prance1520]

WB. You are bias, but the education system is trash. There is no accountability. For anyone. What do you think it would take? I think only drastic measures like complete restructure on the federal level would fix that mess.

I've found the education topic really interesting lately. I work with many Indian folks in my office, and having this discussion makes my gears turn.

They think our education system here is superior (shocks me too), but its our parenting that sets us behind the rest of the world. They talk about how surprised they are on the emphasis American parents put on sports and leisure rather than studies, and how easy it is to get their kids to excel in our school systems because of that misplaced emphasis.

They also say however, that its a product of most of them (the parents) being Indian born into a system where there is MASSIVE competition. If you can't keep up, your basically disregarded for any kind of further education, and only the select make it (which of makes them laugh at our everyone gets a trophy philosophy.) Now remember, this is bias as these are the overachievers who did do well enough in school to make it to big, I'm sure the ones that did not have something different to say about the education system.

That said, Indians (immigrants, not those born in America of Indian decent) make up over half my office of very well paying professional jobs where we can't seem to find qualified Americans.

I'm not really trying to make a point here, just throwing out first hand information which this discussion might find interesting.

[LMingrone]

.....I'm not really trying to make a point here, just throwing out first hand information which this discussion might find interesting.

It's right on point. You'll always hear the white middle-to-upper class saying how Asians are so smart. In reality it's just that they have more drive to succeed education wise. I would also guess it has a lot to do with how easy us white Gen-X/Yers have had it. I stopped going to school until college because of how idiotic most of my peers were. Everything was dumbed down. Everyone cared about being the cool kid, not realizing that the cool kid then, would be the loser later.
I was lucky. My parents let me do whatever the fuck I wanted. I had a nice balance of being the cool kid, studying math/history/science on my own, and being a sports superstar.
I fear for the next generation.

[Warriorbird]

That's kind of stretching things a bit there. That's like saying if I donate to a campaign my company actually donated the money because they write my paycheck.

So employees get to pick where companies donate to? Got it.

[~Rocktar~]

So employees get to pick where companies donate to? Got it.

Companies get their profits from the sale of goods and services of value. The owners of said companies/corporations get to decide where and when those profits are spent. You know, stock holders, the people that put money at risk to make the company, not employees who do not own stock that simply trade time and effort for what they personally find as an acceptable wage of conversion for that time and effort.

Some companies do indeed allow employees a vote in where collected money is spent though typically that only applies to things like collected donations for charity or community outreach programs and not political action and not for the expenditure of profits. Your supposed point is both a distraction and invalid and carries no merit in the debate.

[Tsa`ah]

Are you serious?

Pretty serious. Our resident GS warlock cry baby presented opinion as fact.

1. That unions are not popular as a broad statement.

Suggesting this in light of recent protests and polling is pretty absurd. Responding to the rest of "union" diatribe becomes useless.

2. His thoughts on Obama become equally worthless in that he leads with Obama being elected because of anti-Bush sentiment ... and not the incompetents of his opponent or even an anti-conservative sentiment. To suggest that someone wins the office of POTUS for one singular reason is assinine.

That's even before we get into his list of "flip flops" and campaign promises (never mind that he's accomplished a ton of campaign promises).

Spending and the deficit ... consider the economic collapse and don't be retarded when making statements about campaign promises.

War ... where is the flip flop? He never campaigned on bringing a swift end to both, only Iraq. In fact he was pretty clear about Afghanistan being the war we should focus on.

GITMO ... you mean it's not easy to just close down a military prison loaded with detainees in legal limbo. Detainees that were put in this limbo, violating their basic civil rights, in order to side step US law and international agreements? You just can't close down this installation when you not only have to deal with the issues of legal rights being violated, but an entire political party bent on blocking any attempt of it?

Patriot act ... you mean him renewing three sun setting provisions .... AFTER judicial oversight had been amended into them?

When you cut out the bullshit posted by crb ... you come down to lobbying and transparency. Start a threat and have a discussion ... because it's kind of hard to have any sort of discussion of a crb/PB statement simply because they're so cluttered with bullshit.


What tripe? Do you mean like the "facts" you have laid out thus far in this thread? Like Michelle and Sarah being "whores" in more than one way?

Yes, yes.... those certainly are well thought out and founded "facts"...

Seriously, Shit4Brains, you are making political threads fun again. Please, please continue. Your delusional stupidity is, sadly, not as rare as it used to be, but still quite entertaining.

Yet you keep coming back.

It's very hard to take you seriously when you can't even provide an accurate summation of past comments.

[Tsa`ah]

Companies get their profits from the sale of goods and services of value. The owners of said companies/corporations get to decide where and when those profits are spent. You know, stock holders, the people that put money at risk to make the company, not employees who do not own stock that simply trade time and effort for what they personally find as an acceptable wage of conversion for that time and effort.

Some companies do indeed allow employees a vote in where collected money is spent though typically that only applies to things like collected donations for charity or community outreach programs and not political action and not for the expenditure of profits. Your supposed point is both a distraction and invalid and carries no merit in the debate.

Without the labor ... profit does not exist.

[ClydeR]

The owners of said companies/corporations get to decide where and when those profits are spent. You know, stock holders, the people that put money at risk to make the company, not employees who do not own stock that simply trade time and effort for what they personally find as an acceptable wage of conversion for that time and effort.

Really?

http://corporatedisclosurealert.blogspot.com/2011/03/important-new-sec-ruling-offers.html

[AnticorRifling]

When I'm old enough to run I expect PC contributions to my campain fund.

[ClydeR]

Without the labor ... profit does not exist.

Did you get that from Karl Marx?

[Tsa`ah]

Did you get that from Karl Marx?

Abraham Lincoln.

[ClydeR]

Abraham Lincoln.

Well, I never heard Lincoln say that. It's the question at the heart of today's issues. Which comes first, wealth or jobs? The answer is wealth. You've got to have wealthy people if you want to have any jobs. Don't get it backwards like a Democrat.

[Tsa`ah]

http://riley.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=8&tax_level=4&tax_subject=3&topic_id=1030&level3_id=6723&level4_id=11085

[Back]

Well, I never heard Lincoln say that. It's the question at the heart of today's issues. Which comes first, wealth or jobs? The answer is wealth. You've got to have wealthy people if you want to have any jobs. Don't get it backwards like a Democrat.

Hahaha. Thats good. Thats really really fucking funny. Your characterization of an ignorant bible thumping conservative republican really shines here. Well done!

[Warriorbird]

Companies get their profits from the sale of goods and services of value. The owners of said companies/corporations get to decide where and when those profits are spent. You know, stock holders, the people that put money at risk to make the company, not employees who do not own stock that simply trade time and effort for what they personally find as an acceptable wage of conversion for that time and effort.

Some companies do indeed allow employees a vote in where collected money is spent though typically that only applies to things like collected donations for charity or community outreach programs and not political action and not for the expenditure of profits. Your supposed point is both a distraction and invalid and carries no merit in the debate.

Do most average stockholders? It's no different than a union, with the leadership guiding the funds of people who choose to take part.

[Tsa`ah]

The difference being that unions are largely democratic ... and represent members/people.

[Warriorbird]

The difference being that unions are largely democratic ... and represent members/people.

Right. I just don't consider them functionally somehow "eeeeevil" and different for political donations like some folks.

[~Rocktar~]

Without the labor ... profit does not exist.

Labor that was paid for by a mutually acceptable trade for money. Your distraction has no relevance. Employees have no say in corporate political donations made from corporate profits. If an employee does not wish to be associated with corporate political donations and so on, then find a different employer.

Keep in mind that I don't believe that corporations should be in the political donation business at all since their singular purpose should be to return value and equity to their shareholder. Unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world and lobbying/political contributions will happen regardless so it is likely better to have it out in the open a little more. Politicians are already owned by the largest purse anyway, open giving makes the length of the purse strings a little shorter to trace.

[~Rocktar~]

Really?

http://corporatedisclosurealert.blogspot.com/2011/03/important-new-sec-ruling-offers.html

There was a point? Employees do not have a right to influence or command the political or other spending of a corporation's profits unless they are shareholders OR the corporation management decides to accept their input.

[Gan]

I'm just not sure most parents care about their kid's education...

Why do you suppose that is?

[crb]

Pretty serious. Our resident GS warlock cry baby presented opinion as fact.

1. That unions are not popular as a broad statement.

Suggesting this in light of recent protests and polling is pretty absurd. Responding to the rest of "union" diatribe becomes useless.


What polls? Most of the ones I've seen have been very obviously biased. Plus, really, Republicans being antiunion is not news, if it wasn't a huge asset they would not have been elected.



2. His thoughts on Obama become equally worthless in that he leads with Obama being elected because of anti-Bush sentiment ... and not the incompetents of his opponent or even an anti-conservative sentiment. To suggest that someone wins the office of POTUS for one singular reason is assinine.


Even Obama thought that, which is why he tried so hard to brand McCain as another Bush. Don't be a fucktard.




Spending and the deficit ... consider the economic collapse and don't be retarded when making statements about campaign promises.

Wait...I thought he inherited this crisis, and if he inherited it he should have known it was coming and not have promised to cut the deficit in half? OR did he not inherit it and it caught him by surprise on day 1? I r confuddled!

IT isn't as if Bush had 8 problem free years. Remember 9/11? Two wars? And yet Obama still managed to do more deficit spending in 2 years than Bush did in 8.



GITMO ... you mean it's not easy to just close down a military prison loaded with detainees in legal limbo.

Oh.. I know that, you seem to know that. Everyone knew that. But our community organizer in chief didn't. Like most of the bullshit he says, it is about as deep a cookie sheet. The American Sheeple who voted for here were sold a bill of goods that he couldn't possibly deliver, but that didn't stop him from promising, did it?



Detainees that were put in this limbo, violating their basic civil rights, in order to side step US law and international agreements?

Question. Is there a part of an international treaty that says we cannot indefinitely hold, or even summarily execute if we wanted, enemy combatants caught on foreigh soil on the field of battle who are ununiformed and not claimed by any sovereign state?

Is there are part of the US Constitution which says it applies to same such individuals?

Douchebag.


You just can't close down this installation when you not only have to deal with the issues of legal rights being violated, but an entire political party bent on blocking any attempt of it?

Obama had supermajorities in congress, the republicans couldn't block shit. He could do anything he wanted until Scott Brown was elected, ANYTHING he wanted - unless he was blocked by his own party of course. OMG TRAITORS!




When you cut out the bullshit posted by crb ... you come down to lobbying and transparency. Start a threat and have a discussion ... because it's kind of hard to have any sort of discussion of a crb/PB statement simply because they're so cluttered with bullshit.


roflcopter to the moon.

I'm sure Obama really appreciates you carrying all this water for him pussface, but eventually those spindly liberal arms are going to get tired and when you finally snap that is going to be the hissyfit to end all hissyfits. Please film it and post it on youtube.

[Tsa`ah]

Labor that was paid for by a mutually acceptable trade for money. Your distraction has no relevance. Employees have no say in corporate political donations made from corporate profits. If an employee does not wish to be associated with corporate political donations and so on, then find a different employer.

Keep in mind that I don't believe that corporations should be in the political donation business at all since their singular purpose should be to return value and equity to their shareholder. Unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world and lobbying/political contributions will happen regardless so it is likely better to have it out in the open a little more. Politicians are already owned by the largest purse anyway, open giving makes the length of the purse strings a little shorter to trace.

The premise escapes you.

You can't sell a dozen doughnuts, or even open a doughnut shop ... even krispy cream ... without labor.

Lay down all the cash you want, but labor is the lynch pin. Profit, capital, legal tender, stocks, bonds, interest, dividends ... none of it exists without labor.

[Warriorbird]

Why do you suppose that is?

They were probably poorly educated. I've seen it occur in self-absorbed products of fantastic schools, though. American individualism has a dark side.

[crb]

You also can't get cheese without cows, but the cow doesn't own the farm, and it sleeps in the barn, standing in its own shit.

[Gan]

They were probably poorly educated. I've seen it occur in self-absorbed products of fantastic schools, though. American individualism has a dark side.

One would think that attacking the problem would be more efficient than simply treating the symptoms.

It is human nature to respond to incentive.

What incentives do we have in place to encourage people to choose to educate themselves or their children?

What incentives do we have in place that discourage people from choosing to educate themselves or their children?

[AnticorRifling]

You also can't get cheese without cows, but the cow doesn't own the farm, and it sleeps in the barn, standing in its own shit.

Soy farmers will disagree with you. Also cows can, and often do, sleep laying down which makes cow tipping not as "hilarious" as people think, you knock the cow down it moos then goes right back to sleeping. They sleep outside as often as in the barn, barns are usually for equipment, feed/hay, milking, tons and tons of annoying cats and racoons, etc.

I'm adding nothing of value right now but it distracts me from this stupid database change I've been requested to make.

[ClydeR]

I've seen it occur in self-absorbed products of fantastic schools, though.

That sentence sounds interesting. Could you briefly elaborate?

[~Rocktar~]

The premise escapes you.

You can't sell a dozen doughnuts, or even open a doughnut shop ... even krispy cream ... without labor.

Lay down all the cash you want, but labor is the lynch pin. Profit, capital, legal tender, stocks, bonds, interest, dividends ... none of it exists without labor.

It has no place in the debate on if employees get to control where profits are spent, it is a red herring distraction.

It simply isn't relevant.

Your continued insistence that it is simply confirms your solid and entrenched position as an EXTREME Leftist Socialist almost to the point of hilarity.

[Tsa`ah]

What polls? Most of the ones I've seen have been very obviously biased. Plus, really, Republicans being antiunion is not news, if it wasn't a huge asset they would not have been elected.

Of course if you find the material un-agreeable ... you discount it as "biased". Never mind that you haven't proved a bias, you just assess it as such in order to dismiss it.

Never mind that no republican gained office on a "union" busting platform.


Even Obama thought that, which is why he tried so hard to brand McCain as another Bush. Don't be a fucktard.

Yes ... Obama won because he was black. No, he won because he wasn't Bush. No, he won because of some vast and extensive plot to put a non-citizen into office. No, he won because all of the college kids voted for him. No he won because ...

Most people understand that presenting singular cause/effect statement as factual representations of complicated issues is completely retarded. In case you missed it, Obama wasn't the only person elected to office on Nov 4, 2008.


Wait...I thought he inherited this crisis, and if he inherited it he should have known it was coming and not have promised to cut the deficit in half? OR did he not inherit it and it caught him by surprise on day 1? I r confuddled!

Confusion is the norm for you. No where did I imply that Obama did not inherit a crisis. During a crisis you do what works, and often you have to switch up what you're doing in order to achieve the desired result.



IT isn't as if Bush had 8 problem free years. Remember 9/11? Two wars? And yet Obama still managed to do more deficit spending in 2 years than Bush did in 8.

A problem created isn't a problem inherited. Bush inherited a tax surplus, no wars, and a thriving economy. He did not have to drag the rest of us into two wars. 9/11, an economic meltdown, and Katrina were all things that happened on Bush's watch ... only the meltdown can be attributed, in part, to Bush.

Bush created most of his own problems, problems we're dealing with still. As for your deficit spending comment ... you need a remedial math course.

Deficit spending leads to public debt ... which currently sits at 14.2 trillion

By 07/2009 ... the national debt sat at 11.6 trillion. That is up from the 5.6 trillion from 09/2001.

So, under Bush ...5.8 trillion.

14.2 trillion less 11.6 trillion is 2.6 trillion ... which is less than 5.8 trillion.

Yep ... you need a math course and bad.


Oh.. I know that, you seem to know that. Everyone knew that. But our community organizer in chief didn't. Like most of the bullshit he says, it is about as deep a cookie sheet. The American Sheeple who voted for here were sold a bill of goods that he couldn't possibly deliver, but that didn't stop him from promising, did it?

Shame on him for pushing for the closure of one of the biggest black eyes to US image and legal rights. Or perhaps shame on those that refused to bend and demand that it remain open and operational.


Question. Is there a part of an international treaty that says we cannot indefinitely hold, or even summarily execute if we wanted, enemy combatants caught on foreigh soil on the field of battle who are ununiformed and not claimed by any sovereign state?

Is there are part of the US Constitution which says it applies to same such individuals?

Douchebag.

You should really read the Geneva convention treaties and review the constitution ... its application ... and the case history of placing terrorist before judges and juries.

As for the rest ... and hell, everything up to this point ... it only proves that you just love to pile the insults on top of your own ignorance. Keep it going Skippy.

[Tsa`ah]

It has no place in the debate on if employees get to control where profits are spent, it is a red herring distraction.

It simply isn't relevant.

Your continued insistence that it is simply confirms your solid and entrenched position as an EXTREME Leftist Socialist almost to the point of hilarity.

I've insisted nothing of the sort .. I've only pointed out what most people understand already.

Sorry you do not.

[LMingrone]

Rocktar. I don't feel like arguing and making everything so black and white as you do. I'd like for you tell me why socialism is so bad. Why's everything have to be EXTREME, or leftist, or whatever? There are gray areas. Shit, communism is a perfect government if it didn't involve human nature.

[~Rocktar~]

I've insisted nothing of the sort .. I've only pointed out what most people understand already.

Sorry you do not.

No, you keep trying to distract with a point that has no value what so ever. Business as usual.

[crb]

So... there isn't anything preventing us from summarily executing uninformed enemy combatants captured on the field of battle who are not claimed by any sovereign nation? I thought so.

The Geneva Convention is a treaty dictacting the behavior of signatory nation states in warfare with each other, specifically the treatment of prisoners and the like. It does not mandate trials, in civilian courts, or anything you would like to put on it. It allows us, in fact, to hold prisoners for as long as the conflict lasts. If it were applicable at all here.

It doesn't protect spies (unless, of course, they have diplomatic papers), and it doesn't protect insurgents, nor does it protect terrorists.

The US Constitution is a document chartering the US government, specifically what it can and can not do to US citizens on US soil. It has no passage about how our army must treat captured enemy combatants on foreign soil.

I know your pea brain tries really hard to project these things onto groups that they do not cover, but that doesn't make it so.

[crb]

A problem created isn't a problem inherited. Bush inherited a tax surplus, no wars, and a thriving economy. He did not have to drag the rest of us into two wars. 9/11, an economic meltdown, and Katrina were all things that happened on Bush's watch ... only the meltdown can be attributed, in part, to Bush.



ROFL.

Are you like 10 years old? Bush inherited a recession dumbass. Do you not remember? But yes, Bush is to blame for 9/11 and hurricanes. You can probably blame him for Iraq, truthfully. But not the others.

[Tsa`ah]

So... there isn't anything preventing us from summarily executing uninformed enemy combatants captured on the field of battle who are not claimed by any sovereign nation? I thought so.

The Geneva Convention is a treaty dictacting the behavior of signatory nation states in warfare with each other, specifically the treatment of prisoners and the like. It does not mandate trials, in civilian courts, or anything you would like to put on it. It allows us, in fact, to hold prisoners for as long as the conflict lasts. If it were applicable at all here.

It doesn't protect spies (unless, of course, they have diplomatic papers), and it doesn't protect insurgents, nor does it protect terrorists.

The US Constitution is a document chartering the US government, specifically what it can and can not do to US citizens on US soil. It has no passage about how our army must treat captured enemy combatants on foreign soil.

I know your pea brain tries really hard to project these things onto groups that they do not cover, but that doesn't make it so.

SCOTUS disagrees with you. Given the option, I'll take SCOTUS over you.

[Tgo01]

Pretty serious. Our resident GS warlock cry baby presented opinion as fact.

1. That unions are not popular as a broad statement.

Suggesting this in light of recent protests and polling is pretty absurd. Responding to the rest of "union" diatribe becomes useless.

Yes because opinion polls are chock full of scientific fact goodness.

[AnticorRifling]

ROFL.

Are you like 10 years old? Bush inherited a recession dumbass. Do you not remember? But yes, Bush is to blame for 9/11 and hurricanes. You can probably blame him for Iraq, truthfully. But not the others.

Dude you know he had a weather machine!

[Tgo01]

So employees get to pick where companies donate to? Got it.

Are you suggesting union members get to pick where companies donate to? Maybe some unions do but I sure as hell wasn't allowed to. The only thing I was able to do was to tell them I didn't want my union dues donated to a particular campaign, I wasn't allowed to say "Yeah go ahead and donate my union dues on this guy." It was either their way or nothing. Either way they kept my money.


Do most average stockholders? It's no different than a union, with the leadership guiding the funds of people who choose to take part.

You're sounding like Back now. Most companies require you to join the union to take the job.

[LMingrone]

I think most people grossly overestimate the power of the President.

[Back]

Ha. You don’t understand anything you’re talking about. Obviously you’re just pulling shit out your ass as usual to make your point. As always your pea brain can’t comprehend a simple plain as day statement.

But keep on making us laugh with your misguided attempts at trying not to appear like a retard. Its very entertaining when you look like an idiot as you do time and time again.

While you may think this post is about you. It actually isn’t. Don’t flatter yourself.

[Tgo01]

As for your deficit spending comment ... you need a remedial math course.

Deficit spending leads to public debt ... which currently sits at 14.2 trillion

By 07/2009 ... the national debt sat at 11.6 trillion. That is up from the 5.6 trillion from 09/2001.

So, under Bush ...5.8 trillion.

14.2 trillion less 11.6 trillion is 2.6 trillion ... which is less than 5.8 trillion.

Yep ... you need a math course and bad.

Why did you tell him he needs a remedial math course in deficit spending when all you did was 'school' him in our national debt numbers?

[Tsa`ah]

ROFL.

Are you like 10 years old? Bush inherited a recession dumbass. Do you not remember? But yes, Bush is to blame for 9/11 and hurricanes. You can probably blame him for Iraq, truthfully. But not the others.

Now you're being incoherent. It's bad enough that you botch a reply in a single attempt ... but now you're taking two attempts to botch responses to a single comment.

Never did I blame Bush for 9/11 or Hurricanes. I pointed out that these were events that happened under Bush ... that he responded poorly to. He didn't inherit said issues, he created the problems that arose from his response to said issues. Never once did I blame him. So now you need a remedial math course, and a reading comprehension course. You'll have PB to keep you company in one, Rocktar in the other.

But hey, don't stop spitting out talking points. It's funny.

Only conservatives and their thinktanks buy the "Clinton recession" inherited by Bush ... non-idiots do not.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm

[Tsa`ah]

Why did you tell him he needs a remedial math course in deficit spending when all you did was 'school' him in our national debt numbers?

Did you not understand the statement "deficit spending leads to public debt".

The two are not unrelated .... and are in fact joined at the hip.

[Parkbandit]

I think most people grossly overestimate the power of the President.

And underestimate it when it's convenient.

[Tgo01]

Did you not understand the statement "deficit spending leads to public debt".

Except he wasn't talking about the debt, he was talking about the deficit and you didn't dispute his comment in the slightest.

[crb]

Only conservatives and their thinktanks buy the "Clinton recession" inherited by Bush ... non-idiots do not.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm

You're like this big stupid bear in a cage. I like poking you with a stick.

Look, fucktard. You linked to this Business Week article, that said the dotcom rececession started in March 2001, so Bush didn't "inherit" it from Clinton.

So, it is your opinion that Bush "inherited" a rip roaring economy and then passed some policy his first 6 weeks in office that fucked it up causing it to immediately nose dive? Or maybe... just maybe... some of that track had been laid, hmmm?

[Tsa`ah]

Except he wasn't talking about the debt, he was talking about the deficit and you didn't dispute his comment in the slightest.

Explain to me how Obama could have possibly outspent Bush. How is it possible for Obama to have spent more in 2 years than Bush did in 8 without amassing a higher debt.

[Tsa`ah]

You're like this big stupid bear in a cage. I like poking you with a stick.

Look, fucktard. You linked to this Business Week article, that said the dotcom rececession started in March 2001, so Bush didn't "inherit" it from Clinton.

So, it is your opinion that Bush "inherited" a rip roaring economy and then passed some policy his first 6 weeks in office that fucked it up causing it to immediately nose dive? Or maybe... just maybe... some of that track had been laid, hmmm?

Again, you're disputing claims by more credible people ... far more credible.

[IorakeWarhammer]

well gentlemen..

gitmo is still open, the wars have only expanded, and he's already spent more money than Bush..

everyone else you have voted for has lied. let's give Ron Paul a chance.

[crb]

Okay, I'm wrong, the economy turns on a dime and some piece of legislation Bush passed his first week in office cause the dotcom recession... hmm.. right. I remember the "Wreck the Economy Act of February 2001."

[Warriorbird]

Are you suggesting union members get to pick where companies donate to? Maybe some unions do but I sure as hell wasn't allowed to. The only thing I was able to do was to tell them I didn't want my union dues donated to a particular campaign, I wasn't allowed to say "Yeah go ahead and donate my union dues on this guy." It was either their way or nothing. Either way they kept my money.

That's exactly what I'm not suggesting. I'm saying that corporations and unions function as a rough equivalent here in that you don't get to pick. You're buying into the "unions are the ultimate evil" campaign a bit strongly due to your personal experience. If employees don't like the way a company gives, they can move to another company. If you don't like a union only shop, you can move to another company. Either way the components aren't really guiding the funds. Most stockholders don't either.

[crb]

There is a difference.

A union uses compulsory dues.

This isn't exactly the same thing as employment. You're not forcibly subsidizing the company you work for with a portion of your agreed upon wage or salary.

At least, such is the case in non right to work states.

[Tsa`ah]

Okay, I'm wrong, the economy turns on a dime and some piece of legislation Bush passed his first week in office cause the dotcom recession... hmm.. right. I remember the "Wreck the Economy Act of February 2001."

The arguments are convenient. You want to blame Obama for the current economy ... yet give Bush a pass on the economy as it existed during his tenure. Never mind that you're the only person to come to such hyperbole as a response.

I never suggested that Bush caused the dot com burst. I will say that the manner in which he handled it was completely detrimental to the nation as a whole.


There is a difference.

A union uses compulsory dues.

This isn't exactly the same thing as employment. You're not forcibly subsidizing the company you work for with a portion of your agreed upon wage or salary.

At least, such is the case in non right to work states.

Just your time and labor.

[Warriorbird]

There is a difference.

A union uses compulsory dues.

This isn't exactly the same thing as employment. You're not forcibly subsidizing the company you work for with a portion of your agreed upon wage or salary.

At least, such is the case in non right to work states.

You can choose to not be a member/work there. I've worked several jobs that demanded fees be paid (and some on a regular basis). I understand the concept might be merely beyond your experience.

Stockholders certainly subsidize the companies they own...and some companies are entirely built around employee stockholders as well.

But of course "UNION R GREAT SATAN CUS IT GIVZ TO DEMOCRATZ!"

[Tgo01]

You're buying into the "unions are the ultimate evil" campaign a bit strongly due to your personal experience.

Oh is that what I'm doing? By suggesting it's not the same thing when companies and unions donate money to political funds?

[Warriorbird]

Oh is that what I'm doing? By suggesting it's not the same thing when companies and unions donate money to political funds?

Realpolitik... who gets more donations from where? But of course the anti union campaign is just going on because Republicans are just such good citizens. Corporations are good citizens too! They'd never put money where their employees and stockholders didn't want it to go.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Sounds like a national problem that could eventually ruin our standing in the worlds economy. Oh wait.

So our education system is responsible for the global economic downturn?


You called it. While I think at times the problem is overstated, the willingness to actually innovate isn't there. We've had mostly the same policy for the last three Presidents.

Who needs to be innovative when the government gives you everything? Don't get me wrong, I think our education system sucks ass, but come on it's the reason for the economy?


Only conservatives and their thinktanks buy the "Clinton recession" inherited by Bush ... non-idiots do not.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm

The crazy in this thread is staggering. The economy was struggling prior to 9/11. Do you recall the tech bubble bursting? The housing markets dropping? I've never blamed Clinton for that, nor do I blame Bush. It was lawmakers who thought earnings to price ratios meant nothing, fast and easy banking and irresponsible PEOPLE.

[Tsa`ah]

The crazy in this thread is staggering. The economy was struggling prior to 9/11. Do you recall the tech bubble bursting? The housing markets dropping? I've never blamed Clinton for that, nor do I blame Bush. It was lawmakers who thought earnings to price ratios meant nothing, fast and easy banking and irresponsible PEOPLE.

Umm ... the aforementioned "Clinton recession" is the tech/dot com bubble that burst. I believe I stated as much and I also believe I said that Clinton was no more to blame than Bush was.

I am critical of the RESPONSE.

[Tgo01]

Corporations are good citizens too! They'd never put money where their employees and stockholders didn't want it to go.

You making up arguments again to refute?

[Warriorbird]

You making up arguments again to refute?

Just as quickly as you Socratically backpedal. So far I've heard a lot of "but it's different when unions do it!" while arguing why based on things that companies do too.

[Tgo01]

So far I've heard a lot of "but it's different when unions do it!" while arguing why based on things that companies do too.

Companies deduct a portion of their employees paychecks as 'fees' as use those fees to donate to political funds?

[Warriorbird]

Companies deduct a portion of their employees paychecks as 'fees' as use those fees to donate to political funds?

Two that I've worked for. Stockholders there's even less of a question.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Umm ... the aforementioned "Clinton recession" is the tech/dot com bubble that burst. I believe I stated as much and I also believe I said that Clinton was no more to blame than Bush was.

I am critical of the RESPONSE.

Ok, I'll bite - what was his response, and what should it have been?

[Tgo01]

Two that I've worked for.

Really? You're not just making this up? What was the fee for exactly?

[Warriorbird]

Really? You're not just making this up? What was the fee for exactly?

Leads fees in both cases.

ADT (Tyco) promptly hosted a fundraiser out of our leads fees for a local candidate so that we could "network" and "sell systems."

SHC donated money on a regular basis to "fund the campaign" of our State Commissioner for Insurance. It was shadier than all hell.

It's a soft money strategy used a lot in sales.

[crb]

You can choose to not be a member/work there. I've worked several jobs that demanded fees be paid (and some on a regular basis). I understand the concept might be merely beyond your experience.

Stockholders certainly subsidize the companies they own...and some companies are entirely built around employee stockholders as well.

But of course "UNION R GREAT SATAN CUS IT GIVZ TO DEMOCRATZ!"

You were a stripper? I feel for you, those poor girls typically have to pay to work. But I guess it weeds out the ugly ones.

I think you're smarter than this WB, you're not a raving loon like Tsa'ahana'ha. What is that anyways? Apache for fag?

You know that compulsory unionism is different from employment. Saying they're the same is like being a the guy from the joke who wishes from a car door in the desert so he can roll down his window to get cool. Window's cooling power depends on it being attached to a moving vehicle. It isn't a functional entity by itself. And neither is a union. A parasite cannot live without a host. In your logic a person who works and is part of a union is providing for his employer (and that itself is some ass backwards logic) and providing for his union, creating two entities that can use his work product without his permission. The person who works in a non-union company only has one such entity able to do so. So even in your twisted logic, or that which you present, there is an obvious difference. You can have an employer without a union, but you cannot have a union without an employer.

If people dislike their employer, they can switch jobs, but it isn't as easy to switch entire professions, and in some professions unionization is near 100%. A worker who does not believe in his employer can also slack off, and thus affect the value of his worth product (which apprently you think the evil employer is stealing). He can even steal office supplies. The worker who doesn't like something his union does can't have fewer dues deducted from his paycheck.

In the end, if unions are so great and wonderful. Why is it the typical liberal stance to OPPOSE the FREEDOM for individuals to CHOOSE to support the union or not? Surely if they're so great and everyone agrees with them worker choice is not something dangerous that needs to be stopped? For what crazy person would opt out of all the wonderful rainbows and unicorns? Why not have a right to work country?

[~Rocktar~]

Rocktar. I don't feel like arguing and making everything so black and white as you do. I'd like for you tell me why socialism is so bad. Why's everything have to be EXTREME, or leftist, or whatever? There are gray areas. Shit, communism is a perfect government if it didn't involve human nature.

In every instance of it's long term implementation it has failed and for the very reason you state, human nature. If the collective populous is supported by the state regardless of it's capability, then what incentive is there to excel, innovate or create? If you will not starve regardless of if you work hard for 8 hours or stay home and don't work, then what motivation do you have to work? If you know that you will not advance your position or standard of living by working harder than others, then again, what motivation do you have to work harder?

The answer is none.

In order to enforce the collective support of the state in a Socialist or Communist society, the work needed to get things done, the one and only motivational factor left is violence or threat of violence as can been seen in history.

There are very few remarkable individuals that have come out of Socialist or Communist countries that have indeed produced great works of art, literature and science. The driving force of science, industry and technology in such countries has always been military conflict and not innovation or research for it's own sake or financial reward. There is no reward for excellence, hard work or innovation in Socialism or Communism so it stifles the human spirit and in it's continued quest for self preservation gives rise to oppression and atrocity. No threat of violence is ever effective unless and until it is proven that it can and will be used.

Why would I, or any rational person, want to subscribe to a political and economic philosophy that is destructive to the human spirit, is completely antithetical to human nature and that is a proven failure? Why would anyone want to implement policies and procedures that are known to slow down or even reverse human advancement? Why would anyone want to implement a form of government designed to enslave people and crush their will?

[Tsa`ah]

Ok, I'll bite - what was his response, and what should it have been?

You should probably do your own reading rather than asking me for commentary on his posts.

What should it have been? That it was even brought up is nothing short of asinine.

[Tgo01]

Leads fees in both cases.

ADT (Tyco) promptly hosted a fundraiser out of our leads fees for a local candidate so that we could "network" and "sell systems."

SHC donated money on a regular basis to "fund the campaign" of our State Commissioner for Insurance. It was shadier than all hell.

It's a soft money strategy used a lot in sales.

Well I'll admit I've never heard of such a thing. I think that is equally as shitty as unions taking union fees and donating them to political candidates.

[Warriorbird]

In every instance of it's long term implementation it has failed and for the very reason you state, human nature. If the collective populous is supported by the state regardless of it's capability, then what incentive is there to excel, innovate or create? If you will not starve regardless of if you work hard for 8 hours or stay home and don't work, then what motivation do you have to work? If you know that you will not advance your position or standard of living by working harder than others, then again, what motivation do you have to work harder?

The answer is none.

In order to enforce the collective support of the state in a Socialist or Communist society, the work needed to get things done, the one and only motivational factor left is violence or threat of violence as can been seen in history.

There are very few remarkable individuals that have come out of Socialist or Communist countries that have indeed produced great works of art, literature and science. The driving force of science, industry and technology in such countries has always been military conflict and not innovation or research for it's own sake or financial reward. There is no reward for excellence, hard work or innovation in Socialism or Communism so it stifles the human spirit and in it's continued quest for self preservation gives rise to oppression and atrocity. No threat of violence is ever effective unless and until it is proven that it can and will be used.

Why would I, or any rational person, want to subscribe to a political and economic philosophy that is destructive to the human spirit, is completely antithetical to human nature and that is a proven failure? Why would anyone want to implement policies and procedures that are known to slow down or even reverse human advancement? Why would anyone want to implement a form of government designed to enslave people and crush their will?

So they're violent to people in Scandanavia? Ha ha ha.

[Warriorbird]

You were a stripper? I feel for you, those poor girls typically have to pay to work. But I guess it weeds out the ugly ones.

I think you're smarter than this WB, you're not a raving loon like Tsa'ahana'ha. What is that anyways? Apache for fag?

You know that compulsory unionism is different from employment. Saying they're the same is like being a the guy from the joke who wishes from a car door in the desert so he can roll down his window to get cool. Window's cooling power depends on it being attached to a moving vehicle. It isn't a functional entity by itself. And neither is a union. A parasite cannot live without a host. In your logic a person who works and is part of a union is providing for his employer (and that itself is some ass backwards logic) and providing for his union, creating two entities that can use his work product without his permission. The person who works in a non-union company only has one such entity able to do so. So even in your twisted logic, or that which you present, there is an obvious difference. You can have an employer without a union, but you cannot have a union without an employer.

If people dislike their employer, they can switch jobs, but it isn't as easy to switch entire professions, and in some professions unionization is near 100%. A worker who does not believe in his employer can also slack off, and thus affect the value of his worth product (which apprently you think the evil employer is stealing). He can even steal office supplies. The worker who doesn't like something his union does can't have fewer dues deducted from his paycheck.

In the end, if unions are so great and wonderful. Why is it the typical liberal stance to OPPOSE the FREEDOM for individuals to CHOOSE to support the union or not? Surely if they're so great and everyone agrees with them worker choice is not something dangerous that needs to be stopped? For what crazy person would opt out of all the wonderful rainbows and unicorns? Why not have a right to work country?

Unions have done a lot for people in a lot of jobs. You only function from a management perspective ever or give anecdotal tales of "how evil this union was."

In a free market, why shouldn't people be free to choose to collectively bargain?

I disagree with forced unionization myself, but then again none of my experiences have been with "forced" unionization.

I worked sales far too long. I've also lived in states where unionization is nigh unto illegal. Horrible stuff gets done (often to public workers) and they can't do much of anything about it. Bob McDonnell basically generated a surplus out of slashing education in Virginia. He cut 3x Walker's Wisconsin cuts. None of the employees could do anything to protest or they'd be fired.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

You should probably do your own reading rather than asking me for commentary on his posts.

What should it have been? That it was even brought up is nothing short of asinine.

For real? You can't provide even a sentence or two on why his response was so poor? You haven't defined what it is you so greatly disapprove of so how am I supposed to know what it is you think?

And yes, what should it have been? I don't consider myself so economically sauvy to think I could second guess what was done at the time. And remember, Mr. Asinine, you brought it up.

[Tsa`ah]

For real? You can't provide even a sentence or two on why his response was so poor? You haven't defined what it is you so greatly disapprove of so how am I supposed to know what it is you think?

And yes, what should it have been? I don't consider myself so economically sauvy to think I could second guess what was done at the time. And remember, Mr. Asinine, you brought it up.

If you can't do your own reading ... I can't help you. You're a big boy now.

As I said, that it was even brought up is asinine ... and had you done your own reading you would realize that I did not bring it up.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

If you can't do your own reading ... I can't help you. You're a big boy now.

As I said, that it was even brought up is asinine ... and had you done your own reading you would realize that I did not bring it up.

If you cannot defend your argument, just say so. Hell, if you cannot even DEFINE you argument, say so. FFS man, I'm only asking you what he did that was so aggregious in your mind. Use your words... use your words.

[Tsa`ah]

If you cannot defend your argument, just say so. Hell, if you cannot even DEFINE you argument, say so. FFS man, I'm only asking you what he did that was so aggregious in your mind. Use your words... use your words.

What was my argument then?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

For the love of all that is holy - I don't read every post you make. All I'm asking you is what is it about his response that you reference in this fucking thread that you object too, and what you think he should have done. I cannot read your fucking mind to determine what that is so I asked a very straightforward and simple question of "WHAT WAS IT?"

Jesus Christ dude, I don't have any preconceived notion of what it is you think. I'm ASKING YOU what it is you have a position on.

[Tsa`ah]

For the love of all that is holy - I don't read every post you make. All I'm asking you is what is it about his response that you reference in this fucking thread that you object too, and what you think he should have done. I cannot read your fucking mind to determine what that is so I asked a very straightforward and simple question of "WHAT WAS IT?"

Jesus Christ dude, I don't have any preconceived notion of what it is you think. I'm ASKING YOU what it is you have a position on.



Your problem is that you're incoherent to being with. You hop in and quote a single comment without understanding the context and then start questioning me on crap you should have already read ... not to mention the questioning isn't very specific to begin with.

I'm not a mind reader and you're not helping matters much by either not reading ... or not comprehending.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Your problem is that you're incoherent to being with. You hop in and quote a single comment without understanding the context and then start questioning me on crap you should have already read ... not to mention the questioning isn't very specific to begin with.

I'm not a mind reader and you're not helping matters much by either not reading ... or not comprehending.

LOL, ok.

WINNING!

[Tgo01]

I would save your finger strength if I were you SHM, I gave up on him when he couldn't understand the difference between deficit spending and debt.

[Parkbandit]

Bitch please.. I gave up before you!

Just be entertained by him..

[crb]

Unions have done a lot for people in a lot of jobs. You only function from a management perspective ever or give anecdotal tales of "how evil this union was."

In a free market, why shouldn't people be free to choose to collectively bargain?

I disagree with forced unionization myself, but then again none of my experiences have been with "forced" unionization.

I worked sales far too long. I've also lived in states where unionization is nigh unto illegal. Horrible stuff gets done (often to public workers) and they can't do much of anything about it. Bob McDonnell basically generated a surplus out of slashing education in Virginia. He cut 3x Walker's Wisconsin cuts. None of the employees could do anything to protest or they'd be fired.

In a perfect free market system the one thing you outlaw are monopolies.

A union is a labor monopoly, a cartel, it wouldn't exist in a perfect free market system.

With all the worker safety and antidiscrimination laws on the books any claim that unions are necessary for those reasons is bunk. We don't live in The Jungle.

Oh, and I wouldn't call firing someone to save money by not having to pay them a horrible thing. I would call it a normal economic function. Requiring a female employee to give you a blow job or fire her, now that would be a horrible thing (unless I was the guy getting the blow job, then it'd be a wonderful thing). But that is illegal, no union required.

It is the notion that public employees are entitled to remain employed at the taxpayer's expense for perpetuity that births many of these silly ideas. You are not entited to a job, society or the government doesn't owe you a job.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I wasn't even criticizing, all I asked was what he thought. Yet here we are, a half dozen posts later, and he won't come out from under the tinfoil to answer me.

Did I kick his dog or something?

[Warriorbird]

In a perfect free market system the one thing you outlaw are monopolies.

A union is a labor monopoly, a cartel, it wouldn't exist in a perfect free market system.

With all the worker safety and antidiscrimination laws on the books any claim that unions are necessary for those reasons is bunk. We don't live in The Jungle.

Oh, and I wouldn't call firing someone to save money by not having to pay them a horrible thing. I would call it a normal economic function. Requiring a female employee to give you a blow job or fire her, now that would be a horrible thing (unless I was the guy getting the blow job, then it'd be a wonderful thing). But that is illegal, no union required.

It is the notion that public employees are entitled to remain employed at the taxpayer's expense for perpetuity that births many of these silly ideas. You are not entited to a job, society or the government doesn't owe you a job.

Except nobody breaks up monopolies any more. Taft won. Roosevelt lost.
It's really tough to be considered a monopoly these days, and the percentage of unionized workers is way below what you seem to think it is.

When your "firing to save money" has a direct effect on the quality of society (mass school closings, in McDonnell's case, which make the system worse) it fits into another context. The sheriffs of the state have been compelled to write 50% more speeding tickets to make ends meet.

And they have no recourse to bargain or they get their employees kicked right out.

[Parkbandit]

I wasn't even criticizing, all I asked was what he thought.

Here's where you went wrong.

Don't let it happen again.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Except nobody breaks up monopolies any more. Taft won. Roosevelt lost.
It's really tough to be considered a monopoly these days, and the percentage of unionized workers is way below what you seem to think it is.

When your "firing to save money" has a direct effect on the quality of society (mass school closings, in McDonnell's case, which make the system worse) it fits into another context. The sheriffs of the state have been compelled to write 50% more speeding tickets to make ends meet.

And they have no recourse to bargain or they get their employees kicked right out.

When I worked at AOL, the FTC had many requirements built into the TWC purchase. Microsoft wasn't able to purchase Netscape. It's not that tough at all.

[~Rocktar~]

So they're violent to people in Scandanavia? Ha ha ha.

When they have more than 50% of the people not working and living off they system and no raw materials to support the system, they will be. You are such a consistent one trick pony, keep it up, I need the laughs.

[Tsa`ah]

I would save your finger strength if I were you SHM, I gave up on him when he couldn't understand the difference between deficit spending and debt.

Be honest now ... you gave up after you couldn't demonstrate that one administration outspent the previous administration's 8 year total in only 2 ... while not having a greater debt.


I wasn't even criticizing, all I asked was what he thought. Yet here we are, a half dozen posts later, and he won't come out from under the tinfoil to answer me.

Did I kick his dog or something?

You asked a vague question in reference to a comment that had a number of specifics.

If you can't be specific, let alone coherent ... how in the hell do you expect anyone to answer you?

[LMingrone]

04-04-2011 01:35 PM Explain why socialism is so good and how it's being used effectively in a non-3rd world country with a big population.

I asked first. I never said it was "so good", and I never mentioned "non-3rd world countries with huge populations". Don't put words in my mouth. I said I didn't want to argue, it seems that's all you want to do though. Set up some more straw men to burn down.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Be honest now ... you gave up after you couldn't demonstrate that one administration outspent the previous administration's 8 year total in only 2 ... while not having a greater debt.



You asked a vague question in reference to a comment that had a number of specifics.

If you can't be specific, let alone coherent ... how in the hell do you expect anyone to answer you?

Ok Charlie.

[Tgo01]

[QUOTE=Tgo01;1262525]I would save your finger strength if I were you SHM, I gave up on him when he couldn't understand the difference between deficit spending and debt.


Be honest now ... you gave up after you couldn't demonstrate that one administration outspent the previous administration's 8 year total in only 2 ... while not having a greater debt.

See?

[Warriorbird]

When they have more than 50% of the people not working and living off they system and no raw materials to support the system, they will be. You are such a consistent one trick pony, keep it up, I need the laughs.

But I thought socialism equaled HORRIBLE VIOLENCE. So you're saying not even Communism does? Interesting.

How exactly do you explain China's GDP growth?

[Tsa`ah]

See?

How sad it must be fore you to understand that debt and deficits are different things, though connected ... but can't justify a statement ... let alone defend a statement made by another person (albeit a talking point that is totally false).

It's not finger strength you need to worry about.

[~Rocktar~]

But I thought socialism equaled HORRIBLE VIOLENCE. So you're saying not even Communism does? Interesting.

How exactly do you explain China's GDP growth?

Stop trolling dickweed and learn to read. Oh, wait, if you did that you wouldn't be able to continue trolling and claiming ignorance.

Still haven't answered the questions put to you other than to ignore, distract and lie.

[Warriorbird]

Stop trolling dickweed and learn to read. Oh, wait, if you did that you wouldn't be able to continue trolling and claiming ignorance.

Still haven't answered the questions put to you other than to ignore, distract and lie.

Any answer that doesn't agree with you is "IGNORE DISTRACT LIE." You might try actually addressing points someday.

Your generalization was deeply faulty. Your concept of "SOCIALISM!" is disconnected from reality.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Any answer that Warriorbird doesn't agree with is "PARTISAN BASELESS A LIE."

Fixt.

[Warriorbird]

Fixt.

And here I thought your obsession with me was waning.

I'm sorry I ruin your whole day to the point you have to defend the idea that SOCIALISM! draweth nigh.

[~Rocktar~]

Any answer that doesn't agree with you is "IGNORE DISTRACT LIE." You might try actually addressing points someday.

Your generalization was deeply faulty. Your concept of "SOCIALISM!" is disconnected from reality.

My generalization is based on reality, your lofty concept of Socialism is deeply flawed and ignores historical and factual evidence. You are deeply disconnected from reality and logical thought. I address your points, when you make one, directly and usually pretty succinctly. You on the other hand ignore anything that you don't like or that does not support your position, flat out lie about stuff and insult others. If those tried and true tactics don't work, you simply throw out an incendiary distraction as an attempt to dodge the fact that you are a flaming moron spewing emotional rants as fact like a 3 yr old.

It's not my fault your idealized golden philosophy is deeply flawed and has been proven time and again historically to fail. Why do you cling to a failed philosophy so strongly? Could it be because you know you can't compete in the real world of competition and need to be mollycoddled to survive? Could it be that you are afraid that you simply aren't strong enough or disciplined enough to withstand the hard and sometimes unpleasant task of real work in order to support yourself? Or is it the case, and I think this one more likely, that you think yourself too good to work hard and that you are superior to others and therefore somehow deserving of support and a golden place in the Socialist hierarchy?

[IorakeWarhammer]

Enjoy opening a new political thread, hoping for some semblence of dialog, only for it to digress into the Libtard Warriorbird and the Rethuglican ~Rocktar~ spewing the same tired bullshit back and forth. I swear they could just copy and paste the same comments time and again in every thread and no one would know the difference.


haehoehoaehoahoeahoea

[~Rocktar~]

haehoehoaehoahoeahoea

And you come along and maintain your usual level of contribution which is to say, nothing of value.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

And here I thought your obsession with me was waning.

I'm sorry I ruin your whole day to the point you have to defend the idea that SOCIALISM! draweth nigh.

You draw some really non-intuitive conclusions.

http://www.evolvefish.com/fish/media/B-IMPFIgnoMakiPeop.gif

[Tgo01]

haehoehoaehoahoeahoea

So if you're quoting your 'April Fool's' meltdown thread does that mean it wasn't really a joke?

[IorakeWarhammer]

So if you're quoting your 'April Fool's' meltdown thread does that mean it wasn't really a joke?

the joke was that everyone hoped i would leave but then i didn't.. i was laughing

[Tgo01]

the joke was that everyone hoped i would leave but then i didn't.. i was laughing

So the only bit that was a 'joke' was the you leaving bit? Everything else was you melting down because of the way things are around here?

And I'm some sort of pro Israel fanboy?!

[Clove]

A story comes from Rome, Georgia's Tribune newspaper's obituary page. Mr. Donald Charles Unsworth passed at the age of 78, and his obituary included the following notice:

In lieu of flowers, the family respectfully asked that donations be sent to the American Cancer Society or to the campaign of whoever is running against President Obama in 2012.
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/in-lieu-of-flowers-donate-to-obama-s-opponent-2012

[LMingrone]

Long rant

Wow. Just wow. You realize every form of government is flawed right? Because it involves us, ego and greed driven creatures. Communism, socialism, democracy...ETC. They all work on paper. Inject a little bit of humans into the equation and it all gets fucked up. Socialism (and unions somewhat) help keep both parties involved vested and in check.

[~Rocktar~]

Wow. Just wow. You realize every form of government is flawed right? Because it involves us, ego and greed driven creatures. Communism, socialism, democracy...ETC. They all work on paper. Inject a little bit of humans into the equation and it all gets fucked up. Socialism (and unions somewhat) help keep both parties involved vested and in check.

I never postulated that Capitalism is perfect. It does, however, reward the base factors of human nature instead of fight with them and it does reward excellence and persistence, Socialism does not. And to address your assertion that Socialism keeps both parties in check is absurd, all it does is to further dumb down and enslave the masses to the government teat and enable elitist totalitarian control.

[IorakeWarhammer]

So the only bit that was a 'joke' was the you leaving bit? Everything else was you melting down because of the way things are around here?

And I'm some sort of pro Israel fanboy?!

omg it wasn't a meltdown genius, i took some issues that annoyed me and used them to create a meltdown-like post. i also threw some jokes in there that me and at least 1 other person found funny.

[LMingrone]

I never postulated that Capitalism is perfect. It does, however, reward the base factors of human nature instead of fight with them and it does reward excellence and persistence, Socialism does not. And to address your assertion that Socialism keeps both parties in check is absurd, all it does is to further dumb down and enslave the masses to the government teat and enable elitist totalitarian control.

I can agree with some of that. At least you addressed my point. Just to clear it up; I'm not socialist. My point was only that humans will screw up any form of governing. Just the massive rapage that huge businesses are pulling off right now, a semi-socialist stance might help stop the dam from breaking.

[~Rocktar~]

I can agree with some of that. At least you addressed my point. Just to clear it up; I'm not socialist. My point was only that humans will screw up any form of governing. Just the massive rapage that huge businesses are pulling off right now, a semi-socialist stance might help stop the dam from breaking.

Actually, the "huge rapage" as you describe now isn't unique or even all that massive. In the Middle Ages, pretty much everyone paid 50% of their yearly output in taxes, then they paid to have grain milled, road taxes and all kinds of other fees and taxes, on top of that, they paid the local traveling merchant whatever he asked or bartered for any goods they didn't have. No competition meant no price decreases and your employment was work your ass off or starve.

People chose how they live a lot today because they are stupid, lazy and gullible enough to think that you can get something for nothing. Add to that the continued instant gratification and trend toward dumbing down education and child discipline and you end up with a mass of dumb people waiting to be enslaved by the person that promises the most for the least effort. Capitalism works best with responsible, somewhat educated citizens, Socialism feeds on slaves.

[LMingrone]

So you just pick apples or oranges to fit your stance? Middle ages? Slavery? Break down what you REALLY spend on taxes. It's still about the same. You're still paying your local traveling merchant. They just drive big trucks now.

Dumbing down education and discipline I can agree with.

[Parkbandit]

I can agree with some of that. At least you addressed my point. Just to clear it up; I'm not socialist. My point was only that humans will screw up any form of governing. Just the massive rapage that huge businesses are pulling off right now, a semi-socialist stance might help stop the dam from breaking.

Lulz.

Which dam are you referring to.. and how would a semi-socialist stance stop it from breaking?

[LMingrone]

"Help stop", not "stop". No one shows up for work, multiply that by everyone. Watch them fall.

[Parkbandit]

"Help stop", not "stop". No one shows up for work, multiply that by everyone. Watch them fall.

Ah.. so you believe that the "dam breaking" is the oppressive capitalist system... and to "help stop it from breaking" is for everyone to strike from work to destroy them.

Yea.. you aren't a socialist at all. Really.

[~Rocktar~]

Then they hire illegals.

[LMingrone]

I'm really just arguing for the sake of arguing. You think I want lazy, drug addicted, fools getting free money? Our deficit and the trend of jobs going overseas is scary. There is no right answer to these problems. People will work cheaper doing the same jobs. Our education system is falling apart. Once the Dollar isn't the main source of currency, which might happen soon, we're all screwed. It's better to throw out any idea than to keep going where we are going.

[Clove]

Wow. Just wow. You realize every form of government is flawed right? Because it involves us, ego and greed driven creatures. Communism, socialism, democracy...ETC. They all work on paper. Inject a little bit of humans into the equation and it all gets fucked up. Socialism (and unions somewhat) help keep both parties involved vested and in check.Just so we're all on the same page. Communism and Capitalism are economic systems. Democracy is a form of government. There have been (and are) communist democracies (certain Israeli kibbutz' come to mind).

[Warriorbird]

My generalization is based on reality, your lofty concept of Socialism is deeply flawed and ignores historical and factual evidence. You are deeply disconnected from reality and logical thought. I address your points, when you make one, directly and usually pretty succinctly. You on the other hand ignore anything that you don't like or that does not support your position, flat out lie about stuff and insult others. If those tried and true tactics don't work, you simply throw out an incendiary distraction as an attempt to dodge the fact that you are a flaming moron spewing emotional rants as fact like a 3 yr old.

It's not my fault your idealized golden philosophy is deeply flawed and has been proven time and again historically to fail. Why do you cling to a failed philosophy so strongly? Could it be because you know you can't compete in the real world of competition and need to be mollycoddled to survive? Could it be that you are afraid that you simply aren't strong enough or disciplined enough to withstand the hard and sometimes unpleasant task of real work in order to support yourself? Or is it the case, and I think this one more likely, that you think yourself too good to work hard and that you are superior to others and therefore somehow deserving of support and a golden place in the Socialist hierarchy?

I'm curious as to when those deeply troubled Scandinavian states will devolve to ULTRAVIOLENCE. Last I heard, Finland had the best schools in the entire world.

If I could be called out for relying on anything overly much, it'd be my family. That's a traditional bastion of the capitalist society. The rest is just you blowing hot air. I wonder if it ties into your own deeply seated rage about your own family. I make quite a lot of money off capitalism... I'm just not blind to its faults and seeing MONSTROUS CONSPIRACY everywhere. That'd be you.

I'm also curious as to when you'll make it up to a high school government level of understanding about what socialism actually is.


Just so we're all on the same page. Communism and Capitalism are economic systems. Democracy is a form of government. There have been (and are) communist democracies (certain Israeli kibbutz' come to mind).

Of course. Communism and Socialism also are A. different from what Rocktar thinks and B. different from each other.

[Clove]

Last I heard Norway is doing extremely well. High level of education, low infant mortality, excellent infrastructure oh, and a collective retirement fund that isn't going bankrupt anytime soon. France. Germany. They've done pretty well (historically).

[~Rocktar~]

I'm curious as to when those deeply troubled Scandinavian states will devolve to ULTRAVIOLENCE. Last I heard, Finland had the best schools in the entire world.

And point out where I said ultraviolence? Oh yeah, that's your word and used as an extremist distraction. I would say quit being a fucktard, but hey, we know that is beyond you. And Finland, while having some degree of socialistic practices, also has, as previously stated, a level of export of raw materials to support them. But you would have missed that comment since it doesn't allow you to continue with your degree of asshattery. And I don't see people from around the world flocking to Finland's colleges and universities, primary schools maybe, but really, get over it, the place is run by the capitalistic export of raw materials and it's economy is fueled by capitalistic forces.



If I could be called out for relying on anything overly much, it'd be my family. That's a traditional bastion of the capitalist society. The rest is just you blowing hot air. I wonder if it ties into your own deeply seated rage about your own family. I make quite a lot of money off capitalism... I'm just not blind to its faults and seeing MONSTROUS CONSPIRACY everywhere. That'd be you.

Continuing on with your exceptional degree of distraction techniques this paragraph amuses me no end. You claim to make a lot of money off capitalism and yet at every turn want to implement policies and strategies that are antithetical and destructive to it. Such a level of self loathing is typical of American Democrat Socialists and to be expected. You must be filled with angst over your success and have no clue what to do about it all.

The whole conspiracy thing is your imaginations and again, distraction technique. I don't see "MONSTROUS CONSPIRACY everywhere" as you propose, only arrogant, elitist morons like yourself who want to use the Democrat Socialist party to further enslave the people economically because of course, you know how better to manage their lives than they do.



I'm also curious as to when you'll make it up to a high school government level of understanding about what socialism actually is.


Since I passed Highschool with an A average, I think I am doing ok in the understanding department. Keep in mind, I didn't come through highschool in this current, revisionist period of touchy fealy, feel good, outcome based education, I actually had to study, do the work the first time and pass. Unlike your generation which really is handicapped with the misguided notion that you are all special snowflakes and the world will cater to you.



Of course. Communism and Socialism also are A. different from what Rocktar thinks and B. different from each other.

In theory, they are different from each other, in practice, the line is not nearly so clear. Since we, oopps, when I say "we" I mean myself and other rational people, must deal with reality. Sadly, you seem to be quite disconnected from it and continue on your misguided path through fantasy land.

So, why do you continue to cling to a failed system so tightly again?

[Warriorbird]

And I don't see people from around the world flocking to Finland's colleges and universities, primary schools maybe, but really, get over it, the place is run by the capitalistic export of raw materials and it's economy is fueled by capitalistic forces.

I love it when people invalidate their own arguments. Do you see what you did there?

The Finns don't actually export much in the way of raw materials.

Additional note:

I'm not sure high school graduation circa 1987 was all that different from 1997.

[waywardgs]

Since I passed Highschool with an A average, I think I am doing ok in the understanding department. Keep in mind, I didn't come through highschool in this current, revisionist period of touchy fealy, feel good, outcome based education, I actually had to study, do the work the first time and pass. Unlike your generation which really is handicapped with the misguided notion that you are all special snowflakes and the world will cater to you.


Squiggles graduated high school. Move, bitch! Get out the way!

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l6r1goe4Hk1qc3rklo1_400.jpg

[Clove]

I'm not sure the socialist nations of Norway, Finland and Sweden in practice resemble communism in any way shape or form.

Helsinki University is highly rated though I don't think they can accommodate the volume of students the United States can so granted people aren't "flocking" to Finland.