Republicans - cut it out!

[Gravitymaster 0]

I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney. Only a fool would think either side will ever compromise yet every election cycle some left wing hand ringer makes a post similar to the one I responded to. Our system of government is an adversarial model. That's the way it was set up and that's the way it will always be.

Now you can spend the next 200 posts spouting some ideological bull crap that will never happen. But spouting "can't we just all get along" will make one popular here.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney. Only a fool would think either side will ever compromise yet every election cycle some left wing hand ringer makes a post similar to the one I responded to. Our system of government is an adversarial model. That's the way it was set up and that's the way it will always be.

Now you can spend the next 200 posts spouting some ideological bull crap that will never happen. But spouting "can't we just all get along" will make one popular here.

+1 except for one thing

I am not voting FOR Romney

I am voting against Obama

(and before any of the bs starts flying, it was votes against Bush, even though he was not running, that got Obama in office) that and McCain is a dunce

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney. Only a fool would think either side will ever compromise yet every election cycle some left wing hand ringer makes a post similar to the one I responded to. Our system of government is an adversarial model. That's the way it was set up and that's the way it will always be.

Now you can spend the next 200 posts spouting some ideological bull crap that will never happen. But spouting "can't we just all get along" will make one popular here.

+1 except for one thing

I am not voting FOR Romney

I am voting against Obama

(and before any of the bs starts flying, it was votes against Bush, even though he was not running, that got Obama in office) that and McCain is a dunce

I agree, I too am voting against Obama.

I truly believe that Romney is best qualified to turn our economy around. That's it, that is the critical issue I have based my decision upon. Romney is a capitalist and BHO is a socialist.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Tomorrow, 2 Oct, the rationing of medical treatment in hospitals begins, as per Obamacare

Really? Tell me more. This is the first I heard of this.

- Dan G

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

Tomorrow, 2 Oct, the rationing of medical treatment in hospitals begins, as per Obamacare

Really? Tell me more. This is the first I heard of this.

.

You need to watch Blaze TV. It was a subject of discussion last night on the Wilkow segment, 1900 - 2000.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

Can you summarize? I try not to waste my time with Beck, Matthews, Hannity, Maddow, etc. It's hard to get to the facts when the presenters are so obviously biased.

- Dan G

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

=> The US of A is a net importer of food. . . .

=> The US of A produces no more than 4.7 million barrels a day . . .

=> There is no suggestion as to how our balance of trade might become neutral or positive at any time . . .


This is not higher math, it's simple arithmetic. I wish I was wrong.

Enjoy yourselves, it's later than you think.

Winsor, I inadvertently edited your post instead of replying. My apologies; feel free to repost, or send me what you would like me to replace this (edited) post with.

No big deal; achieving the results you did intentionally is not your style, but doing so by mistake makes sense.

The whole point of the post is that worrying about which party has more assholes than the other is picking flyshit out of pepper. It has taken 40 years of hard work to bring about the disaster we face, and there is no lever one can pull in the election booth that will set things aright in short order - if ever.

The ocean floor is littered with 'unsinkable' ships in the same sense that history is rife with empires that were 'too big to fail.' The fact that the US of A hasn't tanked so far is not due to any particular immunity, but more from desperate efforts to forestall the inevitable on the part of pretty much everyone involved, since we are going to suck down anyone that has anything to do with us when we go.

The reason Bernie Madoff was as successful as he was is reflected by how long it took for his Ponzi scheme to fall apart. A lesser swindler would have come to grief in no time, but he stretched it out for years. The US Government is every bit as much of a Ponzi scheme according to Madoff, and I would rate him as an expert on the subject. When it all goes to hell, it will make the Fall of the Roman Empire look like an historical footnote,

Note the issue is not 'if' so much as 'when and how bad.' We need someone in charge who applies Bob Hoover's advice to fly through the crash as far as possible, but I'm not holding my breath.

We really can't bitch about our interdependency with other economies, the biggest of which are in as bad shape as are we. We have dutifully set up the dominoes, and it may well be others that start knocking them down. If the Euro or the Yuan fails, we can kiss our way of life goodbye.

To go Godwin here, even though 'Mein Kampf' got into some gnarly specifics, many people were surprised when it turned out that the author was not kidding. In all fairness, it is one of the few books I did not finish, since it was so badly written that it was painful to read.

The incumbent similarly made statements for the record that have resulted in accusations of slander/libel when he was quoted. Just because he has been unable to enact policies in favor of which he pontificated does not mean he would not have, given the chance. Just because he espouses positions that I deem idiotic does not make him stupid.

The bottom line is that while I think both sides of the aisle are supremely clueless, I would be pleasantly surprised if whoever gets elected showed the barest modicum of competence in disaster management when dealing with the economy. I suspect, however, that the victor will simply take the fall for all of us.

I wish I could show the slightest glimmering of hope, but every time I run the numbers I get the same results: we're screwed.


BSBD,

Winsor

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I don't know what coverage you're watching, but what I read puts it at a statistical dead heat.

This will probably be the closest election in history with recounts in several states.

that might have been true 4 weeks ago, but Obama has retaken a substantial lead, particularly in terms of the EC. I see no reason to expect it to be as close as 2000 was.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney. Only a fool would think either side will ever compromise yet every election cycle some left wing hand ringer makes a post similar to the one I responded to. Our system of government is an adversarial model. That's the way it was set up and that's the way it will always be.

Now you can spend the next 200 posts spouting some ideological bull crap that will never happen. But spouting "can't we just all get along" will make one popular here.

It is a Democrat who appointed a republican Secretary of Defense (Clinton). John Kerry extended the VP slot to John McCain in 2004, but McCain declined.

Democrats make concrete bipartisan efforts; it is republicans who are obstinate and stubborn, blaming all of the country's problems on the opposite party instead of looking at themselves.

You're projecting when you say that democrats don't try to bridge the gap.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[billvon 3,132]

>I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney.

That's it? Then enjoy another four years of democratic control of the senate and the executive.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney.

That's it? Then enjoy another four years of democratic control of the senate and the executive.

Not a big deal. Politics is cyclical. The pedulum swings one way and then back the other.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I am doing something about it. I'm voting for Romney. Only a fool would think either side will ever compromise yet every election cycle some left wing hand ringer makes a post similar to the one I responded to. Our system of government is an adversarial model. That's the way it was set up and that's the way it will always be.

Now you can spend the next 200 posts spouting some ideological bull crap that will never happen. But spouting "can't we just all get along" will make one popular here.

It is a Democrat who appointed a republican Secretary of Defense (Clinton). John Kerry extended the VP slot to John McCain in 2004, but McCain declined.

Democrats make concrete bipartisan efforts; it is republicans who are obstinate and stubborn, blaming all of the country's problems on the opposite party instead of looking at themselves.

You're projecting when you say that democrats don't try to bridge the gap.

Try following along. What positions are Democrats ready to give up on and concede? Name one. How about abortion? Are you Dems willing to give it up for cuts in defense spending?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Democrats make concrete bipartisan efforts

Take a look at the first two years of the Obama administration when he had the House and a filibuster-proof senate. So what did Obama do in those first two years? He went hard on issues that were either massive (stimulus), right at the ideological divide (Health Care) or highly transformative (cap and trade).

He didn’t need Republican support. And the President spent that time attacking the GOP over and over and over again. How many times did the President say the GOP was offering no solutions? Frequently! They were the “Party of No!” Of course now it is not that solutions haven’t been offered, it’s that he attacks the motives of whatever is proposed. He publicly pleads for bipartisanship and then holds fundraisers where he attacks those on the other side.

Clinton did the same thing. There’s a difference between Clinton and Obama – Clinton adapted when he lost the House and Senate. Clinton HAD to work with Congress to achieve any of his goals. Obama? He’s continue to attack and berate the GOP. He’s highly rhetorical (“Only asking the wealthy to contribute a little more.” Bullshit. You aren’t asking them anything. You will be telling them to contribute a lot more. Let’s be real here.)

This is not to say the GOP are saints. They were pissed off and took to the House. Think any member of the House has a bigger ego than the President? Think again. There are huge egos and the President’s is matched by a Congressman’s. And they gave the President a bit of payback, only were such idiots about it because they failed to understand that the President has a bully pulpit.

Obama has been a horrific dealmaker. He’s been the worst at it. (How many times has Olympia Snowe not even supported him?) The well was poisoned right from the start. He continues to run the Presidency as if Congress will rubber stamp him.

And there are people who actually believe that Obama has nothing to do with the failure of bipartisanship. Just look at what he has said about anything the GOP proposes. Find me some good words stated.

And let's not open the door on Harry "The Bill Blocker" Reid.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Another example of Democrats making concrete bi-partisan efforts.

Quote

The picture got uglier this week when Democrats on a House committee changed the locks on a hearing room door in retaliation for an embarrassing video posted online by panel Republicans. What started as a dispute over an oversight probe blossomed into a mini-melodrama, with each side accusing the other of petty and childish behavior.

And lets not even get started on how the Dems rammed Healthcare Reform through.

"We have to pass the bill so that you can know what's in it"-Pelosi

A shining example of bi-partisanship, don't you think?

Face it. Both parties do it and it's never going to stop.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

Another example of Democrats making concrete bi-partisan efforts.

Quote

The picture got uglier this week when Democrats on a House committee changed the locks on a hearing room door in retaliation for an embarrassing video posted online by panel Republicans. What started as a dispute over an oversight probe blossomed into a mini-melodrama, with each side accusing the other of petty and childish behavior.

And lets not even get started on how the Dems rammed Healthcare Reform through.

"We have to pass the bill so that you can know what's in it"-Pelosi

A shining example of bi-partisanship, don't you think?

Face it. Both parties do it and it's never going to stop.

Even if Obama, Reid and Pelosi are not acting in the spirit of bipartisanship as you and lawrocket pointed out, my point still stands -- when was the last time a republican offered a SecDef or VP slot to a democrat? It doesn't happen. And let's not count the Zell from hell speech at the republican convention in 2004; that was pure BS. Republicans are too busy demonizing democrats. At least we've seen democrats try.

Also, show me the last time a republican poster here acknowledged that BOTH parties are necessary for balance in congress as billvon did. I can't recall, but please -- prove me wrong.

I think if republicans had their way, they would turn this country into a one-party system.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Another example of Democrats making concrete bi-partisan efforts.

Quote

The picture got uglier this week when Democrats on a House committee changed the locks on a hearing room door in retaliation for an embarrassing video posted online by panel Republicans. What started as a dispute over an oversight probe blossomed into a mini-melodrama, with each side accusing the other of petty and childish behavior.

And lets not even get started on how the Dems rammed Healthcare Reform through.

"We have to pass the bill so that you can know what's in it"-Pelosi

A shining example of bi-partisanship, don't you think?

Face it. Both parties do it and it's never going to stop.

Even if Obama, Reid and Pelosi are not acting in the spirit of bipartisanship as you and lawrocket pointed out, my point still stands -- when was the last time a republican offered a SecDef or VP slot to a democrat? It doesn't happen. And let's not count the Zell from hell speech at the republican convention in 2004; that was pure BS. Republicans are too busy demonizing democrats. At least we've seen democrats try.

Also, show me the last time a republican poster here acknowledged that BOTH parties are necessary for balance in congress as billvon did. I can't recall, but please -- prove me wrong.

I think if republicans had their way, they would turn this country into a one-party system.

I don't know how you figure your point stands.

If Kerry offering McCain a V.P. spot is all you've got, then your point just collapsed.

I'm still waiting to hear what issue you think the Dems will give up on just to get the ball rolling. Maybe if they gave up on abortion, the Repubs would view that as a sign and give up something in return. That would really set things in motion, don't you think?

[DanG 1]

Quote

Maybe if they gave up on abortion, the Repubs would view that as a sign and give up something in return. That would really set things in motion, don't you think?

Maybe the Republicans should give up on abortion instead?

In other words, you go first. See the problem?

- Dan G

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

...I'm still waiting to hear what issue you think the Dems will give up on just to get the ball rolling. Maybe if they gave up on abortion, the Repubs would view that as a sign and give up something in return. That would really set things in motion, don't you think?

Do you really think either party is going to move on an entrenched and divisive issue (guns and abortion are the two that come to mind first) as a "sign"?

That would be the political equivalent of bending over with a "Kick Me" sign on your butt.

Political compromise has to start small.

And during the so-called "Supercommittee" crap last fall, the Dems did offer a willingness to bend a little on spending cuts, but the Repubs were not willing to bend on tax increases at all.

I'm more conservative than liberal, but I'm fed up with the bullshit from the Repubs.

The last straw for me was how they were willing to shut down the government if the tax cuts weren't extended to everyone, including the top income levels, but were willing to allow the temporary SS tax breaks to expire without a big fight. Because those don't affect the top income levels.
They did a pretty good job of demonstrating who they really care about, at least to me.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Maybe if they gave up on abortion, the Repubs would view that as a sign and give up something in return. That would really set things in motion, don't you think?

Maybe the Republicans should give up on abortion instead?

In other words, you go first. See the problem?

I'm not the one who made the post about compromising. In case you missed it, I said it would never happen. Please try and keep up with the concersation if you want to take part in it.

[Gravitymaster 0]

So the way the Dems treated the Repubs the first two years of the Obama Admin was just fine with you? All the Executive Orders and Czars is just dandy, huh? Telling us we have to pass bills before we can see what's in them doesn't bother you?

Repubs and Dems have never gotten along. While it's true the polarization has rarely been this high, it's not unpresedented nor will it remain this way. Someimes it take some of the people causing it to either lose an election or to retire.

[DanG 1]

Quote

In case you missed it, I said it would never happen.

In case you missed it, you also posted, "Maybe if they gave up on abortion, the Repubs would view that as a sign and give up something in return. That would really set things in motion, don't you think?" If you didn't mean that, then don't write it.

And in case you can't understand basic English, my post also said that it'll never happen.

- Dan G

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

I'm still waiting to hear what issue you think the Dems will give up on just to get the ball rolling. Maybe if they gave up on abortion,

Why do you want other people to give up their rights when you so zealously guard your own?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

I'm still waiting to hear what issue you think the Dems will give up on just to get the ball rolling. Maybe if they gave up on abortion,

Why do you want other people to give up their rights when you so zealously guard your own?

Do you feel the same about the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments? Like it or not, a couple of your stances implicate each of the aforementioned.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm still waiting to hear what issue you think the Dems will give up on just to get the ball rolling. Maybe if they gave up on abortion,

Why do you want other people to give up their rights when you so zealously guard your own?

Do you feel the same about the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments? Like it or not, a couple of your stances implicate each of the aforementioned.

I disagree.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Which is fine.

My wife is hotter than your wife.