Romney FTW?

[paradise!]

2003: Invade Iraq. Raise debt at rate of ~$1 billion a day. No concerns.

Now: Pull out of both wars, cutting off the needless spending on a people who don't even want to change. Get yelled at for not fixing the debt quick enough.

Love these quirky facebook vids showing far-left and far right voters giving absurd reasons for voting for their candidate. "Obama he Gonna giv free money to da po ppl when he gets in. hell ye"

and lets not forget "i'm voting for romney cuz hes an amurrican. dat barak HOOSEIN obama is a muslim terrorist. reed da bible. da bible saids da antichrist would be a good talkr, dat makes obama da antichrist"


whats with all this fake love for israel from the right? Nobody is buying it. A devout mormon trying to relentlessly champion the rights of people he believes are worshiping a 'false' god? Ye Rite Bruh.

[Money]

who is the faggot deleting posts?

[Money]

[Summa]

Look at the debt and deficit numbers. The math is pretty easy

False. While it is empirically true that the deficit is larger than any in the past; if the next president runs a deficit it is going to be larger than any in the past. It's just the nature of inflation. What should be examined is the deficit generated in comparison to the total money in the US economy at the time. Maybe Obama leads that category too, but I doubt it.

[Summa]

The debt shrinks significantly under only one condition, a vibrant, healthy, and growing economy. And the thing that leads to a vibrant, healthy, and growing economy this is a President who has the ability to lead BOTH parties. Someone who can reach across the aisle and generate cooperation to get things done.

I think this is the largest myth in politics. Maybe bi-partisanship isn't a myth at the House of Representatives level, but it most certainly is a myth at a Senatorial level. It is simply a comment made to say "Hey, let's work together to affirm and pass laws that prove my ideology is right so I can fuck you for the rest of time." I mean how can you look at the fact that 2% of all laws proposed in the past year in the Senate have been made into law and think HOT DAMN, WE GOT OURSELVES SOME BIPARTISANSHIP HERE! Politics has become about winning and losing, not about governing; and I honestly don't know how that will change or if it will change.

“The most important lesson I've learned is that you can't change Washington from the inside. You can only change it from the outside.”

Below you state that you are protesting the lack of term limits for senators and congressmen. Well then you should understand this quote. As is mandated by law, any amendment to the constitution or congressional law must pass through congress. So how is it that you're going to get Congress to impose laws upon themselves that limit their power and ostensibly their pocketbooks. You're not. It's something that must be changed from the outside.

Without a leader in the White House the economy will remain uncertain. And as long as the economy remains uncertain, companies and consumers will continue to hold on to what little cash they have and not spend it reinvesting.

I agree, but tbh we really haven't seen Obama's legislation be given a chance to lead. After he "won" on health care, everything proposed has been cock-blocked by congress. I do however, like your proposal of removing all incumbents; when I fill out my ballot today or tomorrow, I think I will do the same.

[DKFett]

2003: Invade Iraq. Raise debt at rate of ~$1 billion a day. No concerns.

Now: Pull out of both wars, cutting off the needless spending on a people who don't even want to change. Get yelled at for not fixing the debt quick enough.

Love these quirky facebook vids showing far-left and far right voters giving absurd reasons for voting for their candidate. "Obama he Gonna giv free money to da po ppl when he gets in. hell ye"

and lets not forget "i'm voting for romney cuz hes an amurrican. dat barak HOOSEIN obama is a muslim terrorist. reed da bible. da bible saids da antichrist would be a good talkr, dat makes obama da antichrist"


whats with all this fake love for israel from the right? Nobody is buying it. A devout mormon trying to relentlessly champion the rights of people he believes are worshiping a 'false' god? Ye Rite Bruh.

This is one of the smartest and probably the most politically-aware thing anyone has said here.

who is the faggot deleting posts?

Sounds like Aura.

[Money]

nah i was in the wrong post lmao thought i posted that vid in here but it was the other presidential thread and this shit wont let me edit posts anymore..

[Jones]

bradley manning should be free

[Jones]

...or should be given a proper trial (this is actually a big thing (imo)

this forum is weird, i can't edit my posts. ah well more postcount

ez

[the_paul]

Are you really trying to blame the debt going from $10 trillion to $16 trillion in his 3 1/2 years on inflation

[Summa]

Are you really trying to blame the debt going from $10 trillion to $16 trillion in his 3 1/2 years on inflation

no, i am saying that a deficit increase of $1 trillion today is in essence the same as a deficit increase of $100k in let's say....the 1800s. Because the amount increased relative to the total amount of money in circulation is the same proportion. Or have you not studied economics?

[Ephemeral]

I think this is the largest myth in politics. Maybe bi-partisanship isn't a myth at the House of Representatives level, but it most certainly is a myth at a Senatorial level. It is simply a comment made to say "Hey, let's work together to affirm and pass laws that prove my ideology is right so I can fuck you for the rest of time." I mean how can you look at the fact that 2% of all laws proposed in the past year in the Senate have been made into law and think HOT DAMN, WE GOT OURSELVES SOME BIPARTISANSHIP HERE! Politics has become about winning and losing, not about governing; and I honestly don't know how that will change or if it will change.

Below you state that you are protesting the lack of term limits for senators and congressmen. Well then you should understand this quote. As is mandated by law, any amendment to the constitution or congressional law must pass through congress. So how is it that you're going to get Congress to impose laws upon themselves that limit their power and ostensibly their pocketbooks. You're not. It's something that must be changed from the outside.



I agree, but tbh we really haven't seen Obama's legislation be given a chance to lead. After he "won" on health care, everything proposed has been cock-blocked by congress. I do however, like your proposal of removing all incumbents; when I fill out my ballot today or tomorrow, I think I will do the same.

Respectfully disagree. There have been examples of this happening in modern politics. A good example is the current global warming situation which needs leadership. There was a very similar situation with CFCs and the depilation of the ozone layer in the 1980s. Just like global warming there were many detractors; most certainty a complete lack of support by corporate America and the conservative right-wing. And just like global warming, no single country could possibly address the situation by itself. Ronald Reagan demonstrated the leadership skills to bring both sides of the aisle together and to generate support by the rest of the countries of the world. Another modern example was the ‘Gang of Four’ in 2004 when 7 Congressional leaders on each side of the aisle came together to avoid bringing the judicial review process to a complete halt. But I do agree with you that this is rare and that it has been completely absent in the current administration AND Congress.

I think that political differences/debates are the mechanisms that makes a country a great democracy. But keep in mind that partisanship has been around as long as this country has been in existence. In his farewell speech in 1796 George Washington said it “agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms.” And it “kindles the animosity of one part against another (and) foments occasionally riot and insurrection.” Today’s partisanship environment is sedate compared to many of the other past eras, in the 1840-1850s partisanship was so extreme Congressmen took guns to the House of Representatives to protect themselves! And of course even before that the rift between the parties in the House when trying to decide between Jefferson and Burr contributed to violence. When Federalist Alexander Hamilton helped sway the vote to Jefferson, well, we all know what happened next.
Historically I think that waves of partisanship track closely with major changes to the nation as a whole. Inversely, waves of bi-partisanship track closely at times of great adversity (i.e time during 9/11, the 1940s during WW2, the 1960s during the Cold War).

<joke> Perhaps my elderly mother has it right. She says that given the cost of health care and housing it would be best if all elderly people bought a gun and then find a politician to shoot! This way they get free medical care and housing for the rest of their lives and the country gets to start over with a new group of politicians. </joke>

eph

[Summa]

To counter that, there are equally many examples of completely partisan reforms to United States society that fielded great success and are completely agreeable. Stupidly easy examples are such as Lincoln's abolition of slavery and FDR's New Deal. However, I think I may have expressed myself wrong and you got the wrong impression. I was more attempting to state the fact that something like what happened with Brown vs. Board of Education; could never happen in the current political climate. A case where if the vote were to have been published as it actually stood, there would have been a 6-3 vote published; however a meeting was scheduled privately by the Chief Justice in which he asked for a bi-partisan and unanimous decision to affirm that Separate but Equal was appalling and unconstitutional. Even though there were disagreements by those 3 Justices in the minority, they made they effort; and we have a 9-0 vote on record and what is one of the landmark Supreme Court cases in modern history. What I am trying to say is that scratching tooth and nail even in losing battles seems to be the way of the current political climate. Governance is forgotten, meaning is forgotten, just win at all costs.

[Ephemeral]

Completely agree.
But this is why four years ago sipping from the Obama Kool Aide message of ‘hope’ seemed so out of place. Surely they anticipated that Congress was a force to be dealt with in implementing their desired solutions. But instead the plan was to blame previous administrations and the Republican Congress? While true, who cared? This wasn’t leadership.
This election they are again courting the younger vote and again with the ‘hope for a better future’. That’s fine, but the question of ‘how?’ remains. Someone please point us to the plan, for either party, to show how they are going to get things done. At this point I don’t even care if the direction the country is right or left, I am just tired of the political impotence.
eph

[paradise!]

I don't understand how you don't understand the 'how'.

Pulling out of Iraq? Closing Gitmo? Giving a firm deadline for leaving Afghanistan?

Are the first and third things not the biggest moves in shrinking the ballooning debt by the previous administration?

Alternate reality: McCain won. We are still in Iraq. We 'invaded' Libya. We 'invaded' Syria. We are in 4 wars simultaneously, not even including Yemen. Consistent $1+ trillion deficit.