LeviF Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Crone capitalism grows out of to much centralized power. This type of power is the leftists(OWS) wet dream. No so much of a dream any more I suppose. Tea Party is not for a all powerful Fed government. Please If the Tea Party isn't full of corporatocratic shills, I don't know what is. Meanwhile, OWS protesters are largely socialist shills. Let's hear someone talk about a true free market, and maybe I'll start listening.
DC Tom Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I never believe that I am always right. That is such an unbelievably !@#$ing stupid sentiment. I, for one, believe that I am always right...because when I believe I'm wrong, I change my goddamned mind.
Chef Jim Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I, for one, believe that I am always right...because when I believe I'm wrong, I change my goddamned mind. That's almost sig worth................almost.
Jauronimo Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 That is such an unbelievably !@#$ing stupid sentiment. I, for one, believe that I am always right...because when I believe I'm wrong, I change my goddamned mind. Oh yeah? What about that time that I asked you to take care of my goldfish, and then your dog ate my fish, and when I came back to pick it up you told me that I never had a fish? Then why did I have the bowl, Tom? Why did I have the bowl?
3rdnlng Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Oh yeah? What about that time that I asked you to take care of my goldfish, and then your dog ate my fish, and when I came back to pick it up you told me that I never had a fish? Then why did I have the bowl, Tom? Why did I have the bowl? Somehow "A Beautiful Mind" well, comes to mind.
Dante Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 (edited) Please If the Tea Party isn't full of corporatocratic shills, I don't know what is. Meanwhile, OWS protesters are largely socialist shills. Let's hear someone talk about a true free market, and maybe I'll start listening. From the Tea Party Platform "4. Protect Free Markets - America’s free enterprise system allows businesses to thrive as they compete in the open marketplace and strive toward ever better services and products. Allowing free markets to prosper unfettered by government interference is what propelled this country to greatness with an enduring belief in the industriousness and innovations of the populace. From the Tea Party Platform" Also from the Tea Party Platform "9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics - American politics is burdened by big money from lobbyists and special interests with an undue influence on the peoples’ representatives. The Tea Party movement is seen as a threat to the entrenched political parties and thus is the continual target of smear campaigns and misrepresentation of its ideals. We choose not to respond to these attacks except to strongly and explicitly disavow any and all hate speech, any and all violence as well as insinuations of violence, and any and all extreme and fringe elements that bring discredit to the Tea Party Movement. We are a peaceful movement and respect other's opinions and views even though they do not agree with our own. We stand by the Tea Party beliefs and goals and choose to focus our energies on ensuring that our government representatives do the same. " " hmmm..bold part seems to describe you post Give me some proof besides some left wing wacko web site. Edited October 14, 2011 by Dante
/dev/null Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Our country thrived under President Clinton- I know many conservatives refute the reasons, but I find that just as distasteful as how some of the liberals talk about President Bush. I agree. However the Clinton Presidency can hardly be called a Liberal success. During the first 2 year of the Clinton Presidency we had a failed attempt to nationalize Health Care. Then the Democrats got whooped in 1994. Clinton, a much more pragmatic and tactful politician than Obama, felt the winds changing. Instead of hunkering down for a partisan fight, Clinton adopted much of the Conservative agenda. He went from Government can do more and must do more to The Era of Big Government is over If anything, Clinton is an example of how a Conservative government should operate
Booster4324 Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Give me some proof besides some left wing wacko web site. That is hardly fair, you think The Heritage Foundation is a bit suspect and leans left.
Dante Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 That is hardly fair, you think The Heritage Foundation is a bit suspect and leans left. I guess my point is that Levi's comment was just another unsubstantiated allegation that can't be proven. However, when it comes to the OWS ridiculousness the proof is all over YouTube
Rob's House Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Please If the Tea Party isn't full of corporatocratic shills, I don't know what is. Meanwhile, OWS protesters are largely socialist shills. Let's hear someone talk about a true free market, and maybe I'll start listening. What's a corporatocratic shill?
Adam Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 I agree. However the Clinton Presidency can hardly be called a Liberal success. During the first 2 year of the Clinton Presidency we had a failed attempt to nationalize Health Care. Then the Democrats got whooped in 1994. Clinton, a much more pragmatic and tactful politician than Obama, felt the winds changing. Instead of hunkering down for a partisan fight, Clinton adopted much of the Conservative agenda. He went from Government can do more and must do more to The Era of Big Government is over If anything, Clinton is an example of how a Conservative government should operate He was realistic in what he could do, once the republicans controlled Congress. His inability to get healthcare passed really wasn't a failure- a president should never have carte blanche to do whatever he wants. It is a success, when our government prevents bad legislation from becoming law.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Our country thrived under President Clinton- I know many conservatives refute the reasons, but I find that just as distasteful as how some of the liberals talk about President Bush. Liberals have their place, so do conservatives. One pushes to do new things, the other remains frugal. One is for domestic advancements, the other is more for defense. We need both and there is no way around it. I laugh when I hear the lunatic base of both parties complain when they have someone in the white house and that person moves more towards the center- it is called being practical. Liberals have been 100% in charge of most of our major urban centers for the last 50 years. Would you call their results "advancement"? The #s for the working poor say things have stayed the same or mostly gotten worse. How about the sit on my ass poor? Their numbers have increased. How many liberal policies have solved problems? How many have failed? How many have solved some problems, but created others? It's one thing to want something. It's quite another to know how to achieve it, and to do so without unintended consequences. The real problem here is not motives. The problem is methods. Being "for" something, doesn't mean you know how to do it, and, me being against you doing something I know you will fail at, doesn't mean I am against the effort, I am simply against your method. The difference between Clinton and Obama is: Clinton didn't care if a method was Republican, as long as it got results. In fact, he based his last 6 years on Republican methods. Obama is a prisoner of liberal methods, and doesn't understand why they aren't getting results. Obama can't use a Republican method, because he doesn't understand how they work.
Adam Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Liberals have been 100% in charge of most of our major urban centers for the last 50 years. Would you call their results "advancement"? The #s for the working poor say things have stayed the same or mostly gotten worse. How about the sit on my ass poor? Their numbers have increased. How many liberal policies have solved problems? How many have failed? How many have solved some problems, but created others? It's one thing to want something. It's quite another to know how to achieve it, and to do so without unintended consequences. The real problem here is not motives. The problem is methods. Being "for" something, doesn't mean you know how to do it, and, me being against you doing something I know you will fail at, doesn't mean I am against the effort, I am simply against your method. The difference between Clinton and Obama is: Clinton didn't care if a method was Republican, as long as it got results. In fact, he based his last 6 years on Republican methods. Obama is a prisoner of liberal methods, and doesn't understand why they aren't getting results. Obama can't use a Republican method, because he doesn't understand how they work. Clinton was a better leader than Obama, but that was a less partisan time. I would prefer President Clinton or President George HW Bush to President Obama or President George W Bush. In all fairness, I think our last two presidents ran into a country that doesn't want to be led. They want a constitutional monarchy, where they elect the king, who then takes the fall for everything that goes wrong.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Clinton was a better leader than Obama, but that was a less partisan time. I would prefer President Clinton or President George HW Bush to President Obama or President George W Bush. In all fairness, I think our last two presidents ran into a country that doesn't want to be led. They want a constitutional monarchy, where they elect the king, who then takes the fall for everything that goes wrong. Less partisan time? Bull. The first 2 years of Clinton = the first 2 years of Obama to the letter. The difference is, Clinton called up Dick Morris(Republican attack dog) and said "help me". Obama fired everybody but Valerie Jarrett(socialist). The results speak for themselves. And, WRONG: Obama made it about himself during the campaign(or his people did), and then proceeded to hide/punt on every issue on "his" agenda. Pelosi wrote Obamacare. The American people had nothing to do with any of that. I am getting sick and tired of the people being blamed for Obama's failures. In fact, I am getting sick and tired of people blaming anybody other than Obama for Obama's failures.
Adam Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Less partisan time? Bull. The first 2 years of Clinton = the first 2 years of Obama to the letter. The difference is, Clinton called up Dick Morris(Republican attack dog) and said "help me". Obama fired everybody but Valerie Jarrett(socialist). The results speak for themselves. And, WRONG: Obama made it about himself during the campaign(or his people did), and then proceeded to hide/punt on every issue on "his" agenda. Pelosi wrote Obamacare. The American people had nothing to do with any of that. I am getting sick and tired of the people being blamed for Obama's failures. In fact, I am getting sick and tired of people blaming anybody other than Obama for Obama's failures. I was a lot younger when Clinton was in office and was more worried about my grades at the time. I don't remember that, but I will take your word for it. As far as Obama goes, I don't think he will go down as a great president, but I think time will be kind to his image as it has with his predecessor (at least with people who aren't unmoveably on the far left). Obama's presidency included the health care bill, which was a terrible law and the elimination of Osama bin Laden. He should not get full credit or blame for either- the president never should get full credit or blame for anything.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 (edited) I was a lot younger when Clinton was in office and was more worried about my grades at the time. I don't remember that, but I will take your word for it. As far as Obama goes, I don't think he will go down as a great president, but I think time will be kind to his image as it has with his predecessor (at least with people who aren't unmoveably on the far left). Obama's presidency included the health care bill, which was a terrible law and the elimination of Osama bin Laden. He should not get full credit or blame for either- the president never should get full credit or blame for anything. Clinton tried the health care thing, and was badly mauled for it. Amongst other things, that is how he lost the Senate/House in 1994. It wasn't anybody else's fault. Clinton blew it, and Democrats in Congress caught hell for it. Veeeery few Congresspeople are good enough in their own right to be immune to effects of a bad president. Nobody in their right mind would blame anybody else but Clinton for at least 75% of that disaster. And, nobody would give credit to anybody else for Clinton accepting his mistakes, and righting his own ship. The problem here is leadership. People remember a schitty leader more than they remember what they did/didn't do. People remember Jimmy Cater's "general malaise" speech = blaming Americans instead of himself. Few remember Camp David. How about you? Without google, what about Camp David is especially significant for Carter? See? Now go look. That's a big deal, but nobody gives a F. Jimmy Carter will always be the guy who schit the bed and then went on TV and blamed everybody else. Edited October 15, 2011 by OCinBuffalo
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Clinton tried the health care thing, and was badly mauled for it. Amongst other things, that is how he lost the Senate/House in 1994. It wasn't anybody else's fault. Clinton blew it, and Democrats in Congress caught hell for it. Veeeery few Congresspeople are good enough in their own right to be immune to effects of a bad president. Nobody in their right mind would blame anybody else but Clinton for at least 75% of that disaster. And, nobody would give credit to anybody else for Clinton accepting his mistakes, and righting his own ship. The problem here is leadership. People remember a schitty leader more than they remember what they did/didn't do. People remember Jimmy Cater's "general malaise" speech = blaming Americans instead of himself. Few remember Camp David. How about you? Without google, what about Camp David is especially significant for Carter? See? Now go look. That's a big deal, but nobody gives a F. Jimmy Carter will always be the guy who schit the bed and then went on TV and blamed everybody else. Accountability, and thirty years later Americans (you and me) are still to blame... Even worse. I mean come on... Jimmy Carter was right. We got guys here on this very board ripping on huge pensions yet, have no qualms about taking the very same money if it was afforded to them. Ignorant, unethical idiots. It is all about "me." Even worse 30 years into the "conservative revolution."
OCinBuffalo Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Accountability, and thirty years later Americans (you and me) are still to blame... Even worse. I mean come on... Jimmy Carter was right. We got guys here on this very board ripping on huge pensions yet, have no qualms about taking the very same money if it was afforded to them. Ignorant, unethical idiots. It is all about "me." Even worse 30 years into the "conservative revolution." Ha! This is ironic and moronic at the same time. There is a huge difference between "take" and "earn". Your use of the word take is very telling. Government employees take what's given to them, while private sector people earn what they get. Taking care of me, yeah, that's all about me. I don't expect anybody else to take care of me. And, if I F up, I don't expect to blame other people(unless I'm being paid to blame other people ).
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Ha! This is ironic and moronic at the same time. There is a huge difference between "take" and "earn". Your use of the word take is very telling. Government employees take what's given to them, while private sector people earn what they get. Taking care of me, yeah, that's all about me. I don't expect anybody else to take care of me. And, if I F up, I don't expect to blame other people(unless I'm being paid to blame other people ). Only from you... In the case of the Illinois pensions being very bloated... It is about taking, God knows they didn't earn it... Even their salaries when they were working.
LeviF Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 hmmm..bold part seems to describe you post Give me some proof besides some left wing wacko web site. Yes, I'm a part of an entrenched political platform Does the name Dick Armey ring a bell? What's a corporatocratic shill? A corporatocracy is a form of government that serves the interests of, and may be run by, corporations.
Recommended Posts