To Conservatives, Tea Partiers On The Train...

brianlux

Jason P wrote:

Here is what makes me angry about the current state of politics:

Politicians don't focus on using their best judgement to make decisions. Instead, the focus on catering to groups that get them re-elected and avoid making any drastic decisions for fear of becoming unpopular. Thus, we are stuck in a retarded cycle that I don't see a clear way out of.

The question that I've been asking myself lately is, "Why the hell should I even care anymore?"

I (hopefully) have another 5-6 decades left on this rock. Why should I spend that time focusing on politics? I've noticed that everyone that follows politics closely shares a common trait ... the are ALWAYS angry about something. The fact of the matter is, why should we always be angry?

Most of the threads on this board are essentially "Hey, Can You Believe What ______ Did???" And then we all gripe about it depending what side of the issue we are on. But we are not really changing anything, so why bother with it?

I'm still following politics, but I hope to break free by weening myself off over the next year. My current strategy is to close off any hope that there is a candidate that will turn this country around. Instead, I will focus on their shenanigans and develop a strategy that shields me from the impact of their decisions.

I'll end this rant with a quote I overheard.

"If it doesn't make you happy, or make you money…then let it go!”

Good post, Jason P. Politics does seem like "business as usual" much of the time. And yes, there is a lot of anger stirred up by the political landscape. And it does make a lot of sense to step back from it all now and then and remember there is more to life than than political conflict- stop and look at what is good about life.

I just hope we don't all throw our hands up and stop caring about the health of our planet. Without a healthy planet to live on, there would be no politics. But of course worrying about the environment 24/7 doesn't allow us time to enjoy what good there is in the world either and your post reminds me I need to do this more often. Thank you for that!

mikepegg44

mickeyrat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

I want to know when the Repubs are get to the business at hand which is working FOR this country and not just working against The Pres and Dems.

DO YOUR GD JOBS!!!!!!!!

some consider working against the democrats as working for the country

working for their re-election maybe. But continueing to block any idea proposed by the other "side" and putting nothing forth into action from your own party isnt working for the country. At least in my independent opinion.

term limits. No one would care about re-election if you could only get elected once

mickeyrat

mikepegg44 wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

some consider working against the democrats as working for the country

working for their re-election maybe. But continueing to block any idea proposed by the other "side" and putting nothing forth into action from your own party isnt working for the country. At least in my independent opinion.

term limits. No one would care about re-election if you could only get elected once

In full agreement. How do we go about getting a referendum going in a national election? Is the federal election system set up fo rsomething like that? Local and state level I know is, but is federal? If not, I believe it should be.

Sludge Factory

To answer OP's question, Obama has:

•switched his position on closing down Guantanemo for one.
•switched his position on trying those held there in court to trying them at military tribunals including people who have been held indefinitely with no real charges being made against them.
•He basically spoke out of both sides of his mouth regarding going after NAFTA/not going after NAFTA during his campaign for President.
•Instead of scaling back on our interventionist policy he has increased it by dedicating US resources to the undeclared war in Libya. Regardless of how the White House tries to spin it, our involvement is an act of war.
•He didn't follow the constitution and the law of the land in obtaining approval from Congress before or after the time period allowed by the War Powers Act and he continues to say he has done nothing wrong there when Senator Obama has statements out there that directly contradict what President Obama is now currently saying.
•He supports the belief that the President should be able to have anyone detained at his order, who is on American soil, including the citizens, indefinitely without a trial or charges being made against them simply if someone deems them a terrorist. This is very much like how the New Salem witch trials began, but on a federal level and sounds like something Bush would stump for; not a democrat who is supposed to be concerned about our civil liberties
•He continues and expands on many of Bush's terrible policies and decisions.
•When a senator, he was very much against raising the debt ceiling, even voted against it. Now he is very much for raising the debt ceiling

He essentially talks out of both sides of his mouth...so I suppose he is an excellent politician to have made it so far.

mikepegg44

also, one thing stuck out to me last night that really bothered me when he said it. I let it go last night, but then began thinking about it this morning.

"What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do?"


um...I might be off base, but is he calling the constitution a rigid idea about what government could or could not do? and then saying it should be ignored in some cases? I hope I am interpreting this wrong. But I seem to be stuck on that idea today. Any help on another interpretation?

Cosmo

mikepegg44 wrote:

also, one thing stuck out to me last night that really bothered me when he said it. I let it go last night, but then began thinking about it this morning.

"What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do?"


um...I might be off base, but is he calling the constitution a rigid idea about what government could or could not do? and then saying it should be ignored in some cases? I hope I am interpreting this wrong. But I seem to be stuck on that idea today. Any help on another interpretation?

...
Just to clarify this one topic, The Constitution does not address this issue. If it does, then, please, direct me to section that defines it. Our Constitution was written to be slightly vague in order to growth as the nation grew and those of us living in 2011 do not have to rigidly adhere to conditions that existed in 1776. That is the beauty of it and points out the solid, reasoned foresight of our nation's founders.
The rigid idea is the idea that there is something in the Constitution that says 'Thou Shalt' or 'Thou Shalt NOT' in it. That rigid idea exists in the minds of people who believe they think they know what governement can and cannot do.

mickeyrat

mikepegg44 wrote:

also, one thing stuck out to me last night that really bothered me when he said it. I let it go last night, but then began thinking about it this morning.

"What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do?"


um...I might be off base, but is he calling the constitution a rigid idea about what government could or could not do? and then saying it should be ignored in some cases? I hope I am interpreting this wrong. But I seem to be stuck on that idea today. Any help on another interpretation?

Constituon isnt a rigid document though. Can be amended at any time. And has been too. I think he was refering more to the rigid ideas that party politics have painted themselves into a corner with.

One way to read it is to be openminded about ideas.

Jason P

brianlux wrote:

Good post, Jason P. Politics does seem like "business as usual" much of the time. And yes, there is a lot of anger stirred up by the political landscape. And it does make a lot of sense to step back from it all now and then and remember there is more to life than than political conflict- stop and look at what is good about life.

I just hope we don't all throw our hands up and stop caring about the health of our planet. Without a healthy planet to live on, there would be no politics. But of course worrying about the environment 24/7 doesn't allow us time to enjoy what good there is in the world either and your post reminds me I need to do this more often. Thank you for that!

Thanks.

In regards to the environment, I'm just going to take personal responsibility and do what I can to help. Luckily for me, my job allows me to make decisions that can make a positive impact. I hope others decide to do the same and not wait for a politician in shining armor to do it for us.

Godfather.

Byrnzie wrote:

unsung wrote:

5. They stopped deportations of aliens with minor criminal offenses.

I'm interested to know why you think this is a bad thing?

If someone is, say, cautioned for a minor driving offense, then should they be deported?

ANYBODY here illegaly should be deported.

Godfather.

mikepegg44

mickeyrat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

also, one thing stuck out to me last night that really bothered me when he said it. I let it go last night, but then began thinking about it this morning.

"What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do?"


um...I might be off base, but is he calling the constitution a rigid idea about what government could or could not do? and then saying it should be ignored in some cases? I hope I am interpreting this wrong. But I seem to be stuck on that idea today. Any help on another interpretation?

Constituon isnt a rigid document though. Can be amended at any time. And has been too. I think he was refering more to the rigid ideas that party politics have painted themselves into a corner with.

One way to read it is to be openminded about ideas.

that is what I was hoping for...had constitution on the brain...hadn't thought of it like that

Cosmo

Thanx for responding, everyone. The major grievences seem to be these:
Gun Control (although there have been no actions taken to support this)
We are still at war.
We are still incarcerating detainees at Guantanamo without charges filed against them.
Extension of the Patriot Act
Pro-Big Banks (and Financial Institutions)
Class Warfare aimed at the wealthy.
Not stopped Illegal Immigration.

...
What it sounds like is everyone is pretty much on the same page.
These are valid grievences and i agree with most of them... but let's be honest, these conditions didn't begin in January of 2009. If you are anti-war today, you were anti-war in 2003, right?
I mean, yeah, these things could be changed by the current admnistration... but, other than the Health Care Bill... what is President Obama's Administration responsible for?
...
Anti-Gun... well, even if he personally wants stricter controls... what has he done (not said) that is anti-gun? Other than rounding up the arms in the hands of the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The War, Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act tend to be Conservative talking points. I mean, I just can't picture Conservative Republicans (or Rush Limbaugh) sharing the same view about the message Cindy Sheehan carried (although, in my opinion, Sheehan's deliver of her valid message was pretty fucking horrible)

Regarding Financial grievences... I don't understand how Obama can be pro-Big Banking... and wage Class Warfare at the same time. How does that work?

Stopping Illegal Immigration... well, join the ranks of every President.

I think this points out that we are pretty much on the same page. We are anti-War (current wars), want to see Guantanamo shutdown and the Patriot Act expired. We don't want to bail out rich fucking assholes that have fucked us up and that these big fucking financial institutions need to be regulated because they prove to us that they just cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

brianlux

Cosmo wrote:

I think this points out that we are pretty much on the same page. We are anti-War (current wars), want to see Guantanamo shutdown and the Patriot Act expired. We don't want to bail out rich fucking assholes that have fucked us up and that these big fucking financial institutions need to be regulated because they prove to us that they just cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

Well said, Cosmo.

blackredyellow

mikepegg44 wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

some consider working against the democrats as working for the country

working for their re-election maybe. But continueing to block any idea proposed by the other "side" and putting nothing forth into action from your own party isnt working for the country. At least in my independent opinion.

term limits. No one would care about re-election if you could only get elected once

And finance reform... Just the idea that you need to raise and spend millions of dollars to get elected to a job that pays $174k, just shows how fucked up things are. Where is the majority of these legislators' time, effort and attention going? To the benefit of the industries/special interest/etc who helped raise that money.

Sludge Factory

Cosmo wrote:

Thanx for responding, everyone. The major grievences seem to be these:
Gun Control (although there have been no actions taken to support this)
We are still at war.
We are still incarcerating detainees at Guantanamo without charges filed against them.
Extension of the Patriot Act
Pro-Big Banks (and Financial Institutions)
Class Warfare aimed at the wealthy.
Not stopped Illegal Immigration.

...
What it sounds like is everyone is pretty much on the same page.
These are valid grievences and i agree with most of them... but let's be honest, these conditions didn't begin in January of 2009. If you are anti-war today, you were anti-war in 2003, right?
I mean, yeah, these things could be changed by the current admnistration... but, other than the Health Care Bill... what is President Obama's Administration responsible for?
...
Anti-Gun... well, even if he personally wants stricter controls... what has he done (not said) that is anti-gun? Other than rounding up the arms in the hands of the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The War, Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act tend to be Conservative talking points. I mean, I just can't picture Conservative Republicans (or Rush Limbaugh) sharing the same view about the message Cindy Sheehan carried (although, in my opinion, Sheehan's deliver of her valid message was pretty fucking horrible)

Regarding Financial grievences... I don't understand how Obama can be pro-Big Banking... and wage Class Warfare at the same time. How does that work?

Stopping Illegal Immigration... well, join the ranks of every President.

I think this points out that we are pretty much on the same page. We are anti-War (current wars), want to see Guantanamo shutdown and the Patriot Act expired. We don't want to bail out rich fucking assholes that have fucked us up and that these big fucking financial institutions need to be regulated because they prove to us that they just cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

I mostly agree with what you are saying here but I do take exception to the “more regulations” part. The big institutions have plenty of regulations on them to begin with. In fact, they wouldn’t have it any other way because the regulations that are posed onto the big businesses of America is a key hurdle in preventing smaller upstarts from ever being able to compete on a level playing field. The market is not allowed to weed out the bad businesses when the big businesses are in bed with government already. You want more regulation? Well so do these big fucking financial institutions. Sure they will cry and moan about it, but in the end they will work their contacts in the government so that the regulations look like a slap on the wrist but ends up being further protectionism.
If we didn’t have such protectionisms in place the corporations would be forced to actually compete on a level playing field as opposed to gaming the system; increasing regulations only plays into solidifying those at the top. Sure, outwardly it affects them too, but in the end it stagnates everything.
Government regulations is usually a barrier for new entrants into specific sectors so no one can really ever start up and compete on a level playing field with the corporations; they are too protected from having lawsuits held against them when they do wrong but also well endowed with assets to go after smaller upstarts if they even so much as think about infringing on “their market". The best a small company can hope for in these situations is that instead of lawsuits they are offered to be bought out. The already established corporations will adapt or move elsewhere while anyone even thinking of starting up a business plan will have a huge hurdle to leap before they can even begin to compete.
Some examples of barriers:
http://www.doaskdotell.com/content/smallbiz.htm
http://www.pagoppolicy.com/Display/Site ... hivers.pdf

mikepegg44

Cosmo wrote:

Thanx for responding, everyone. The major grievences seem to be these:
Gun Control (although there have been no actions taken to support this)
We are still at war.
We are still incarcerating detainees at Guantanamo without charges filed against them.
Extension of the Patriot Act
Pro-Big Banks (and Financial Institutions)
Class Warfare aimed at the wealthy.
Not stopped Illegal Immigration.

...
What it sounds like is everyone is pretty much on the same page.
These are valid grievences and i agree with most of them... but let's be honest, these conditions didn't begin in January of 2009. If you are anti-war today, you were anti-war in 2003, right?
I mean, yeah, these things could be changed by the current admnistration... but, other than the Health Care Bill... what is President Obama's Administration responsible for?
...
Anti-Gun... well, even if he personally wants stricter controls... what has he done (not said) that is anti-gun? Other than rounding up the arms in the hands of the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The War, Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act tend to be Conservative talking points. I mean, I just can't picture Conservative Republicans (or Rush Limbaugh) sharing the same view about the message Cindy Sheehan carried (although, in my opinion, Sheehan's deliver of her valid message was pretty fucking horrible)

Regarding Financial grievences... I don't understand how Obama can be pro-Big Banking... and wage Class Warfare at the same time. How does that work?

Stopping Illegal Immigration... well, join the ranks of every President.

I think this points out that we are pretty much on the same page. We are anti-War (current wars), want to see Guantanamo shutdown and the Patriot Act expired. We don't want to bail out rich fucking assholes that have fucked us up and that these big fucking financial institutions need to be regulated because they prove to us that they just cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

agreed. Things didn't start the day he got elected, but when you run on a platform of hope and change, and there seems to be no hope and nothing is changing...what are you left with

he can be pro-big banks and a class warrior...He loves the money that Goldman-Sachs and others give, so he helps them out...there is a word for it, hypocrisy, His constant rhetoric depicting those who are wealthy as the enemy of the prosperity of America divides people and really does keep his base happy... That is the class warfare he is engaged in... If I have to hear that bullshit about warren one more fucking time I am going to lose my mind...That may not be what he means to do, or the point he is trying to make, but that is how it is coming across...


That is just my opinion of him...he seems like a fine man, he wants the best for a lot of people, but he seems overwhelmed by the job...he may just not be cut out for President and that is ok, he can do a lot of good for a lot of people after his presidency has come and gone.

fear4freedom

great points everyone! But i would say the issues with having Obama as president are deeper...such as his views! You cannot change the way he thinks.....he is not experienced enough to lead this nation! He sought out radicals in college. His own words....
He is a marxist and his father was a marxist muslim. He looks up to his father. His middle name is Hussein! CMon!
He doesnt have American Pride running through his blood! I dont see that passion and pride in him. I dont feel it in him. He doesnt put his hand on his heart for the Anthem! His views of big govt. dont work in this type of country...unless you want to fundamentally transform it! This country is not small enough, nor built for big govt., entitlement society from cradle to grave. This philosophy leads to a dependent society, which turns people more complacent and lazy. It kills the entrepreneurial spirit! The personal responsiblity factor is being taken away!
He is the most divisive president i have ever known!
He has totally blown a great opportunity to unite this country and show people a new way!
His policies are total job killers and creates an atmosphere of uncertainty with everyone from top to bottom
His energy policies are weak, lackluster and non existent! If so, they are too expensive
His Health Care bill is a monstrosity! Too expensive.....too much costs....unfair....unconstitutional!
His jobs bill.....is aimed at unions and payoffs to people he owes from the elections!
Everything he does.....is to payoff someone or some big corp. that supported him!
Thats all for now...i can go all night! He sucks!
Kennedy and Clinton Democrats are considered BLUE DOG DEMS....thats ok.....but this liberal socialist, marxist.....is no good for this country! Enemies and radicals from around the world....have taken over the Democratic Party!

CH156378

fear4freedom wrote:

great points everyone! But i would say the issues with having Obama as president are deeper...such as his views! You cannot change the way he thinks.....he is not experienced enough to lead this nation! He sought out radicals in college. His own words....
He is a marxist and his father was a marxist muslim. He looks up to his father. His middle name is Hussein! CMon!
He doesnt have American Pride running through his blood! I dont see that passion and pride in him. I dont feel it in him. He doesnt put his hand on his heart for the Anthem! His views of big govt. dont work in this type of country...unless you want to fundamentally transform it! This country is not small enough, nor built for big govt., entitlement society from cradle to grave. This philosophy leads to a dependent society, which turns people more complacent and lazy. It kills the entrepreneurial spirit! The personal responsiblity factor is being taken away!
He is the most divisive president i have ever known!
He has totally blown a great opportunity to unite this country and show people a new way!
His policies are total job killers and creates an atmosphere of uncertainty with everyone from top to bottom
His energy policies are weak, lackluster and non existent! If so, they are too expensive
His Health Care bill is a monstrosity! Too expensive.....too much costs....unfair....unconstitutional!
His jobs bill.....is aimed at unions and payoffs to people he owes from the elections!
Everything he does.....is to payoff someone or some big corp. that supported him!
Thats all for now...i can go all night! He sucks!
Kennedy and Clinton Democrats are considered BLUE DOG DEMS....thats ok.....but this liberal socialist, marxist.....is no good for this country! Enemies and radicals from around the world....have taken over the Democratic Party!

:roll:

CH156378

fear4freedom wrote:

great points everyone! But i would say the issues with having Obama as president are deeper...such as his views! You cannot change the way he thinks.....he is not experienced enough to lead this nation! He sought out radicals in college. His own words....
He is a marxist and his father was a marxist muslim. He looks up to his father. His middle name is Hussein! CMon!
He doesnt have American Pride running through his blood! I dont see that passion and pride in him. I dont feel it in him. He doesnt put his hand on his heart for the Anthem! His views of big govt. dont work in this type of country...unless you want to fundamentally transform it! This country is not small enough, nor built for big govt., entitlement society from cradle to grave. This philosophy leads to a dependent society, which turns people more complacent and lazy. It kills the entrepreneurial spirit! The personal responsiblity factor is being taken away!
He is the most divisive president i have ever known!
He has totally blown a great opportunity to unite this country and show people a new way!
His policies are total job killers and creates an atmosphere of uncertainty with everyone from top to bottom
His energy policies are weak, lackluster and non existent! If so, they are too expensive
His Health Care bill is a monstrosity! Too expensive.....too much costs....unfair....unconstitutional!
His jobs bill.....is aimed at unions and payoffs to people he owes from the elections!
Everything he does.....is to payoff someone or some big corp. that supported him!
Thats all for now...i can go all night! He sucks!
Kennedy and Clinton Democrats are considered BLUE DOG DEMS....thats ok.....but this liberal socialist, marxist.....is no good for this country! Enemies and radicals from around the world....have taken over the Democratic Party!

Just out of curiosity, have you ever blown Ronald McDonald?

Byrnzie

fear4freedom wrote:

great points everyone! But i would say the issues with having Obama as president are deeper...such as his views! You cannot change the way he thinks.....he is not experienced enough to lead this nation! He sought out radicals in college. His own words....
He is a marxist and his father was a marxist muslim. He looks up to his father. His middle name is Hussein! CMon!
He doesnt have American Pride running through his blood! I dont see that passion and pride in him. I dont feel it in him. He doesnt put his hand on his heart for the Anthem! His views of big govt. dont work in this type of country...unless you want to fundamentally transform it! This country is not small enough, nor built for big govt., entitlement society from cradle to grave. This philosophy leads to a dependent society, which turns people more complacent and lazy. It kills the entrepreneurial spirit! The personal responsiblity factor is being taken away!
He is the most divisive president i have ever known!
He has totally blown a great opportunity to unite this country and show people a new way!
His policies are total job killers and creates an atmosphere of uncertainty with everyone from top to bottom
His energy policies are weak, lackluster and non existent! If so, they are too expensive
His Health Care bill is a monstrosity! Too expensive.....too much costs....unfair....unconstitutional!
His jobs bill.....is aimed at unions and payoffs to people he owes from the elections!
Everything he does.....is to payoff someone or some big corp. that supported him!
Thats all for now...i can go all night! He sucks!
Kennedy and Clinton Democrats are considered BLUE DOG DEMS....thats ok.....but this liberal socialist, marxist.....is no good for this country! Enemies and radicals from around the world....have taken over the Democratic Party!

catefrances

Sludge Factory wrote:

...
He essentially talks out of both sides of his mouth...so I suppose he is an excellent politician to have made it so far.

never forget the man is also a lawyer.