So Dummycrats

[Jim in Anchorage]

What alternative solutions are available now that the 2 "parties" have completely skewed the playing fields so no other party or individual can even get a seat at the table? The real "alternative" is to return the federal government to ONLY its Constitutional responsibilities but with the current level of stupidity coursing through the electorate, there's absolutely zero chance of that every happening.

 

The rest of that paragraph is typical hypocrisy.

 

Oh look, more typical partisan tactics. Anyone who isn't a liberal is immediately "far right". In my case, nothing could be further from the truth. You will rarely see me joining in with the liberals on this board because it's equally rare to see them bring a single issue to the table that has any merit.

 

Let's see. I was against the Iraq war. I was against the "Patriot" Act. I was against the formation of the Department of Homeland Security. I think homosexuals should be allowed to marry. I think abortion and drugs should be legal (and in most cases retroactive). I'm totally against religion in government. Let me know which of those is a staple of the "far right", will you?

 

I was for tax cuts but said they didn't go anywhere near far enough and I was against virtually all spending increases that the current administration levied.

 

The fact is, you and the rest of the partisans read exactly what you want to. There's no secret that my politics rarely lineup with liberal "ideology" because I understand the appetites of the powerful when they get unlimited access to other people's money and refuse to turn a blind eye for the sake of "pie in the sky".

 

 

Because it's reality. About the only thing the last administration did was raise the levels on retirement savings but even they couldn't bring themselves to take the government's hands off it by simply indexing it for inflation. The administration before that did even less for the average American. I know it's hard to fathom that the system is entirely broken - but it is.

 

That's so stupid it's just funny. Now pretending that Republicans and Democrats are somehow different is "flexible" thinking.

 

Really? I haven't come to terms with the fact (sic) that politics is a messy, impure process? Yet I'm the one that thinks the federal government should be severely limited in their power and you are an avowed liberal. Yep, you're facing reality.

Why do you defend yourself against that junk? Let them wallow in their own crap.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Why do you defend yourself against that junk? Let them wallow in their your own crap.

 

Fixed.

 

When one gets owned they ususally find the need to blather and ramble on nonsensically like AD always finds the need to do. He is a legend in his own mind.

[The Dean]

What alternative solutions are available now that the 2 "parties" have completely skewed the playing fields so no other party or individual can even get a seat at the table? The real "alternative" is to return the federal government to ONLY its Constitutional responsibilities but with the current level of stupidity coursing through the electorate, there's absolutely zero chance of that every happening.

 

That's so stupid it's just funny. Now pretending that Republicans and Democrats are somehow different is "flexible" thinking.

 

Really? I haven't come to terms with the fact (sic) that politics is a messy, impure process? Yet I'm the one that thinks the federal government should be severely limited in their power and you are an avowed liberal. Yep, you're facing reality.

 

 

The real problem seems to come from your distorted sense of history, and your implication that the Constitution is something other that what it is.

 

This country has operated under a predominately two-party system since shortly after the end of the Revolution, with of course, the occasional rise of a third party, of any relevance. Two dominating parties may not be your ideal scenario, but it is the scenario that was put in place by some of the very men that wrote the Constitution. When neither party has represented an issue that a substantial percentage of the populace believe needs to be addressed, a third party has formed around the issue in question. The system hasn't changed, all that much, since the late 1700's.

 

The role of the Federal Government was also decided, on a number of occasions, many years ago. Right from the get-go, with the Federalists controlling the country, it became clear that the USA was going to be a country that was dominated by a central, Federal government. I would have hoped that the Civil War would have decided that issue, once and for all.

 

I can't even imagine the hell that would come from letting States and Localities decide the important aspects of everyday life, in this country. I wouldn't be surprised if slavery still existed in certain areas of this country, if it were left up to the states. Interstate travel, commerce, communication, relocation, etc would be a nightmare. The USA would be a patchwork mish-mash of different, and possibly contrary, laws and policies.

 

And, don't think that your rights, or your privacy, would be any more protected by a weaker Federal government. I would expect States to be fully involved in any number of methods to invade your personal integrity. Of course, as local and state politics is even more corrupt than federal politics, I would expect the state policies to be more draconian, with less oversight, than current Federal policies. I will take a strong messy Federal government over having to deal with any number of petty tyrants, for important issues (social and otherwise) any day.

 

The Constitution is a text, and as with ANY text is subject to interpretation. It is not simply a document of words, but ideas. It always amuses me (and scares me a little, quite frankly) when people talk about getting back to "The Constitution", as if it is a all-inclusive (and excludes anything not specifically mentioned) rule book for the running of the country. I'm quite certain that I wouldn't like the interpretation you, and those like you, would put on that text.

 

No, I will take, and deal with, the sloppy, dirty, slow-moving process the very founders of the country, and the writers of the Constitution, put in place. I won't criticize the system for being what it is, simply hoping I lived under a different system. You see, Darin, the world, or at least the USA, passed you by before 1800.

[Max Fischer]

"Dummycrats!!!" That's so funny.

 

I bet your friends in second grade had milk coming out their noses. Keep up the good work.

[Chump Change]

"Dummycrats!!!" That's so funny.

 

I bet your friends in second grade had milk coming out their noses. Keep up the good work.

 

I know...Repigs is soo much more original and mature!

[ExiledInIllinois]

The people that call them self "Consitutionalists" crack me up... They want to literally live by the letter and narrow interpretation of the written word that appears on the Constitution, failing to see that the US Constitution is a living breathing document.

 

We have citizens in a state that live literally by the letter of the law as drawn up in code on a piece of paper. It is called the state of Louisiana... How nicely that state runs!

[Max Fischer]

I know...Repigs is soo much more original and mature!

 

Really? I think that sounds stupid, too.

[Alaska Darin]

The real problem seems to come from your distorted sense of history, and your implication that the Constitution is something other that what it is.

 

This country has operated under a predominately two-party system since shortly after the end of the Revolution, with of course, the occasional rise of a third party, of any relevance. Two dominating parties may not be your ideal scenario, but it is the scenario that was put in place by some of the very men that wrote the Constitution. When neither party has represented an issue that a substantial percentage of the populace believe needs to be addressed, a third party has formed around the issue in question. The system hasn't changed, all that much, since the late 1700's.

"It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another."

- George Washington's view on the impending 2-party system, from his farewell address.

 

That man was smarter than you with 200 fewer years of history to learn from. My sense of history isn't distorted at all, it's quite keen. It's unfortunate that men crafty enough to create perhaps the greatest document in world history just couldn't leave all of Jolly ol' behind. We'd have been much better for it.

 

The role of the Federal Government was also decided, on a number of occasions, many years ago. Right from the get-go, with the Federalists controlling the country, it became clear that the USA was going to be a country that was dominated by a central, Federal government. I would have hoped that the Civil War would have decided that issue, once and for all.

Love how this particular subject is totally black and white for you, but virtually everything else is subject to ridiculous interpretation.

I can't even imagine the hell that would come from letting States and Localities decide the important aspects of everyday life, in this country. I wouldn't be surprised if slavery still existed in certain areas of this country, if it were left up to the states. Interstate travel, commerce, communication, relocation, etc would be a nightmare. The USA would be a patchwork mish-mash of different, and possibly contrary, laws and policies.

You mean because it isn't now? That's actually funny. The "strong" federal government has virtually ignored its Constitutional responsibilities like infrastructure and intrastate commerce in favor of wasteful populist spending. If it weren't for WWII and the resulting infrastructure and manufacturing capability, we'd likely be closer to third world than at any time in our history - and it'd be mostly due to FDR's "New Deal".

 

And, don't think that your rights, or your privacy, would be any more protected by a weaker Federal government. I would expect States to be fully involved in any number of methods to invade your personal integrity. Of course, as local and state politics is even more corrupt than federal politics, I would expect the state policies to be more draconian, with less oversight, than current Federal policies. I will take a strong messy Federal government over having to deal with any number of petty tyrants, for important issues (social and otherwise) any day.

More "pie in the sky crap". Every level of government is corrupt. Good luck fighting any level or getting help from same without a crapload of cash in your pocket. But you hold up the FG as some kind of superhero.

 

The Constitution is a text, and as with ANY text is subject to interpretation. It is not simply a document of words, but ideas. It always amuses me (and scares me a little, quite frankly) when people talk about getting back to "The Constitution", as if it is a all-inclusive (and excludes anything not specifically mentioned) rule book for the running of the country. I'm quite certain that I wouldn't like the interpretation you, and those like you, would put on that text.

Thanks for your very pedestrian interpretation. You don't need to explain to me how it's been interpreted. I've spent countless hours of my adult life researching decisions. One only has to look at the Supreme Court voting 5-4 along political lines on Heller to know how incredibly !@#$ed up we really are.

 

And thanks for letting me know you wouldn't like any interpretation that I, or those like me would have put in the text. I'll let you know the very minute you have an ounce of credibility with me.

No, I will take, and deal with, the sloppy, dirty, slow-moving process the very founders of the country, and the writers of the Constitution, put in place. I won't criticize the system for being what it is, simply hoping I lived under a different system. You see, Darin, the world, or at least the USA, passed you by before 1800.

In 1800 you'd have been a boot licker for the Crown. You're too big a pansy to face reality now when it's easy to do so. It's not tough to imagine which side you'd join between the greatest fighting force in the world and a buncha rag-tag farmers.

[Alaska Darin]

Fixed.

 

When one gets owned they ususally find the need to blather and ramble on nonsensically like AD always finds the need to do. He is a legend in his own mind.

Jesus Christ, Eric. Do you strive to be a parody or is it just come naturally?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I don't listen to talk radio, Annie, er...Elliot...er...

 

It's called facts. For partisans, they seem to be virtually impossible to face. So far "Change We Need" is "More of the Same with Different Suitors Getting Their Share".

 

But follow along blindly, since you obviously can't help yourself.

Facts as Darin sees them, I see just opinion... No I haven't read the proposal and the jury is still out on Obama....

 

But to blindly attack him based on some mindless lemming repeating the liberal echo chamber is much even for you.

 

The right wing echo chamber is just as bad, and both are mindless....

 

So what specifically do you have a problem with in his proposal and where did you see... in another words what source did you use to obtain it? Call me cynical, but I don't believe it unless it is posted somewhere by the man who wrote it... Not some piece of toilet paper taken from a transition team member with chicken scratch on it.

 

That being said with all the borrowing we have done to pay for the stupid war in Iraq and give aways to the Defense Industrial complex and health insurance industry over the last 8 years, not to mention the exorbitant increase in bureaucracy under this soon to be former President, it is going take a little while to rein in all this spending while stimulating an economy put in the crapper brought by an Administration the let the crooks of the free market run amok.

 

The SEC should be dissolved and taken over by the CFTC. Cut USDA personnel by 40,000 and the same with Commerce and start investigating Defense contracts to see if they actually delivered on what they said... I am sure HHS and Dept. of Ed. could use some and replace half the staff at interior, especially the AK staff and renegotiate all the royalties paid to the feds for mineral rights especially in AK.... Those would be could smaller government reductions. But the problem now is so many folks have lost jobs, doing this now would be nuts... So what are you going to do???

 

It is going to need time AD, so don't listen to the radio or the TV but think about what you are saying before you go off half-cocked.... Or maybe not, that is what makes this board fun and hey, I have been guilty of it more than a few times.

[Alaska Darin]

Facts as Darin sees them, I see just opinion... No I haven't read the proposal and the jury is still out on Obama....

 

But to blindly attack him based on some mindless lemming repeating the liberal echo chamber is much even for you.

Blindly attack? There isn't anything blind about it.

The right wing echo chamber is just as bad, and both are mindless....

No argument there.

So what specifically do you have a problem with in his proposal and where did you see... in another words what source did you use to obtain it? Call me cynical, but I don't believe it unless it is posted somewhere by the man who wrote it... Not some piece of toilet paper taken from a transition team member with chicken scratch on it.

Specifically? The fact that it's exactly the same bill of goods that's been sold to us for 30+ years.

That being said with all the borrowing we have done to pay for the stupid war in Iraq and give aways to the Defense Industrial complex and health insurance industry over the last 8 years, not to mention the exorbitant increase in bureaucracy under this soon to be former President, it is going take a little while to rein in all this spending while stimulating an economy put in the crapper brought by an Administration the let the crooks of the free market run amok.

Why are you limiting it to 8 years? It's been going on for many times that number. Either you're ignorant or incredibly dishonest. Which is it? Are you going to tell me that what's going on now isn't a result of continuing policy failures instituted by Carter, Reagan, GHWB, and Bill Clinton? Really?

The SEC should be dissolved and taken over by the CFTC. Cut USDA personnel by 40,000 and the same with Commerce and start investigating Defense contracts to see if they actually delivered on what they said... I am sure HHS and Dept. of Ed. could use some and replace half the staff at interior, especially the AK staff and renegotiate all the royalties paid to the feds for mineral rights especially in AK.... Those would be could smaller government reductions. But the problem now is so many folks have lost jobs, doing this now would be nuts... So what are you going to do???

We're going to keep doing the same thing and pretend that this time it'll be different. I'm not even going to try to understand WTF you're talking about on your "proposed" cuts/changes.

It is going to need time AD, so don't listen to the radio or the TV but think about what you are saying before you go off half-cocked.... Or maybe not, that is what makes this board fun and hey, I have been guilty of it more than a few times.

I don't watch television news or listen to the radio and I certainly don't need your blessing to post the inevitable hypocrisy that the next administration is going to bring. But you go ahead and start the apologies for them but understand that it's pretty much going to be a full time job.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Jesus Christ, Eric. Do you strive to be a parody or is it just come naturally?

 

No parody. You are rambling. Let it go dude.

[Alaska Darin]

You are rambling. Let it go dude.

 

That "advice" would be more likely to be considered if the person giving it had the sense to use it on occasion.

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

That "advice" would be more likely to be considered if the person giving it had the sense to use it on occasion.

 

Tit for tat, looks like Darin once again is the bigger rat.

 

You just couldn't let it go, could ya?

 

Oh well, carry on.

[Bill from NYC]

Where's the howling over Obama's plan to cut taxes while raising spending? You know, exactly the same thing the hated George W. Bush did that you people couldn't help spew over.

 

But this is somehow "change".

 

Right.

 

My favorite interview of the day was some liberal lemming on MSNBC talking about how the government will "invest" in alternative technologies and that will be the silver bullet that "saves" America. When pressed for facts she stated "I trust our government because I'm a patriot".

 

Sheer genius.

 

Meanwhile, the New York Times reported that Senator Clinton helped a company get huge government contracts after they contributed to the Clinton "Foundation". Once again, the silence is deafening.

 

I wonder how the dummycrats feel about him?

 

I am NOT saying republicans are good. In fact, the party looks to be in horribly bad shape; in many ways a disgrace with "leaders such as McCain and Schmuckabee. That doesn't change the fact that this guy doesn't want to pay taxes, employs illegal aliens, and is supposed to lead us out of an economic crisis.

[Alaska Darin]

I wonder how the dummycrats feel about him?

 

I am NOT saying republicans are good. In fact, the party looks to be in horribly bad shape; in many ways a disgrace with "leaders such as McCain and Schmuckabee. That doesn't change the fact that this guy doesn't want to pay taxes, employs illegal aliens, and is supposed to lead us out of an economic crisis.

They feel he's more of the "Change We Need". Because you can put lipstick on a partisan pig.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Facts as Darin sees them, I see just opinion... No I haven't read the proposal and the jury is still out on Obama....

 

But to blindly attack him based on some mindless lemming repeating the liberal echo chamber is much even for you.

 

The right wing echo chamber is just as bad, and both are mindless....

 

So what specifically do you have a problem with in his proposal and where did you see... in another words what source did you use to obtain it? Call me cynical, but I don't believe it unless it is posted somewhere by the man who wrote it... Not some piece of toilet paper taken from a transition team member with chicken scratch on it.

 

That being said with all the borrowing we have done to pay for the stupid war in Iraq and give aways to the Defense Industrial complex and health insurance industry over the last 8 years, not to mention the exorbitant increase in bureaucracy under this soon to be former President, it is going take a little while to rein in all this spending while stimulating an economy put in the crapper brought by an Administration the let the crooks of the free market run amok.

 

The SEC should be dissolved and taken over by the CFTC. Cut USDA personnel by 40,000 and the same with Commerce and start investigating Defense contracts to see if they actually delivered on what they said... I am sure HHS and Dept. of Ed. could use some and replace half the staff at interior, especially the AK staff and renegotiate all the royalties paid to the feds for mineral rights especially in AK.... Those would be could smaller government reductions. But the problem now is so many folks have lost jobs, doing this now would be nuts... So what are you going to do???

 

It is going to need time AD, so don't listen to the radio or the TV but think about what you are saying before you go off half-cocked.... Or maybe not, that is what makes this board fun and hey, I have been guilty of it more than a few times.

That sort of breathtaking ignorance explains many of the posts I see here. All the extracted oil in Alaska is on STATE land. There are no Fed royalties to "renegotiate" Do the research I would expect from a 10 year old, at minimum

[Alaska Darin]

That sort of breathtaking ignorance explains many of the posts I see here. All the extracted oil in Alaska is on STATE land. There are no Fed royalties to "renegotiate" Do the research I would expect from a 10 year old, at minimum

Research is hard - which is why pretty much everyone just regurgitates what the talk box tells them. Now get out there and worship the latest flavor of the month.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Research is hard - which is why pretty much everyone just regurgitates what the talk box tells them. Now get out there and worship the latest flavor of the month.

Good thing I have yellowlines to tell me what that is. It is very difficult to duplicate a completely random thought process on my own,as chaos theory would predict.

[Alaska Darin]

Good thing I have yellowlines to tell me what that is. It is very difficult to duplicate a completely random thought process on my own,as chaos theory would predict.

I especially liked how he accused me of doing something that he's obviously guilty of. Must have been raised Catholic.