Sequestration is BOVINE CACA!!!!

[Bob Maxey]

At the end of the day, it's the voters pulling the levers. Not saying all the other stuff isn't part of the problem, but it still comes down to voters pulling levers.

What do you expect? The low information voter gets his news from a liberal press hell bent on getting rid of Republicans. We do not read the facts in the press or on the boob tume and so much of what Obama is doing and the effects it will have on this country is never revealed by the press.

So, Duh . . .we end up with an Obama. Not a big surprise there.

Obama will increase welfare spending and when His wife runs on the promise of more free crap and 99% taxes for the rich, she is in. Then Obama will be elected king and I'll move to Germany or perhaps Canada because they have two kids that will enjoy three terms while waiting for daddy's coronation.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Americans don't really want the small fuel efficient cars you find in Europe. Don't get me wrong, quality wise, they're as good as any you'd find here IME but there's not much of a market here for a small, fuel efficient car. Ideally we want a ginormous SUV that gets 70 mpg. That's what we want.

Yes well, plenty of people in Europe do too. Doesn't make them right, it makes them bad with money and resources.

 

[SiempreTuna]

What do you expect? The low information voter gets his news from a liberal press hell bent on getting rid of Republicans. We do not read the facts in the press or on the boob tume and so much of what Obama is doing and the effects it will have on this country is never revealed by the press.

All these issues are discussed extensively outside the right wing press. If he was reading the 'liberal press' he'd know about them because the liberal press actually values balance so discusses both sides of an argument.

Not something the most ardent supporter could ever claim of the right wing press.

Obama will increase welfare spending

Welfare spending did increase vastly when the GOP destroyed the economy a couple of years back.

Recently, it's been falling as the economy has improved - in the teeth of an all out, no compromise war by the GOP to prevent any improvement in anything in the hope that it would stop Obama getting re-elected. They failed, but they don't appear to have worked that out yet.

promise of more free crap and 99% taxes for the rich, she is in

Sorry, but that is ridiculous right wing propoganda.

First, tax rates for the rich are at the lowest they've been for 30 years. Obama's most radical suggestion has been to put them up by a couple of percent to the level they were at before the GOP cut them and turned an all time historic surplus into an all time historic deficit.

Second, what free crap?

Third, even if the Democrats did offer free crap, how would that be different to the monumental tax cuts the GOP keep promising their supporters? Despite the fact they're forever bleating on about the deficit. That they created. By cutting taxes.

Then Obama will be elected king and I'll move to Germany or perhaps Canada because they have two kids that will enjoy three terms while waiting for daddy's coronation.

So you're threating to leave the US because it's going "socialistic" and you want to go to countries which are WAY more progressive than the US will ever be?

Actually, that would be good: Germany and Canada are really nice, progressive countries that are doing pretty darn well: the German economy is the most successful of all the western economies and has been for most of the last 60 years.

If you were to move there you'd see for yourself that all the things - like welfare spending, government financed health care, gun control etc - that Fox news has it's viewers dribbling in fear about, actually work pretty well. There's really nothing to be scared about.

 

[syi]

If you were to move there you'd see for yourself that all the things - like welfare spending, government financed health care, gun control etc - that Fox news has it's viewers dribbling in fear about, actually work really well. There's really nothing to be scared about.

While I agree with you on the subject of moving to more progressive countries because of our own progression. I don't agree with the simplicity of your counter argument. those issues are not nearly as cut and dry, especially in germany. Using Fox news as a point in your argument is childish and makes it seem like you're looking down on others. From what I can see USA, CAN, and GER all enjoy prosperous but very different lives. they all have glaring problems, as any government or sovereign nation would. Just as we do. The problem that is a rising recently, and it's a dosey, are the recent legislation passed effecting amendments 1,2, and the right to peaceful assembly. It's been discussed for years that we need revision. specifically on the hill. but it isn't happening, and the people seem to be unwilling to do what needs to be done. what we had to do to gain independence. It's our duty, to this country and our fellow man. to ensure that this will be a peaceful and prosperous place for generations to come. Even so, It's not that simple. The problems we have are rooted deeply in the past and branch out across oceans. I see uncertain times coming.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Yes well, plenty of people in Europe do too. Doesn't make them right, it makes them bad with money and resources.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. If someone wants a huge vehicle and they can afford it, I say more power to them.

 

[SiempreTuna]

those issues are not nearly as cut and dry, especially in germany

Obviously, I'm over simplifying, the point is that nobody who goes to Germany could possibly come away thinking that the sky had fallen in and the country was going to dogs in the way the right wing press (Fox being the most prominent and virulent example) would have you believe would be the case if the US moved an iota away from the radically right wing agenda the GOP is persuing.

Using Fox news as a point in your argument is childish and makes it seem like you're looking down on others

Obama has been vilified as a communist by the right wing for implementing a HC policy that was created by Republicans and implemented within the last 10 years by the last GOP presidential candidate.

There is no moderate right wing left in the US - the Tea Party and their media proxies (lead by Fox news) have destroyed it.

You can't complain when people address the Fox News culture directly.

the recent legislation passed effecting amendments 1,2, and the right to peaceful assembly

Bush did kick the living **** out of large parts of the first amendement and Obama hasn't done much to correct that, true. We had Blair do exactly the same over here. Wrong. Very wrong.

Re the second amendment: nothing that has been proposed recently would even take things back to how they were before Reagan loaded the Supreme Court. What you have now is an extremist interpretation of the amendement unprecedented in US history.

It's been discussed for years that we need revision. specifically on the hill. but it isn't happening, and the people seem to be unwilling to do what needs to be done

No argument there.

what we had to do to gain independence

WHAT?!!

The US has been INVADED?!

Why did that not make the news?!

It's our duty, to this country and our fellow man. to ensure that this will be a peaceful and prosperous place for generations to come. Even so, It's not that simple. The problems we have are rooted deeply in the past and branch out across oceans. I see uncertain times coming.

Times have always been uncertain. The idea that American faces any existential threat is just wrong. You will probably have to share the stage with other superpowers - China, India, maybe even Europe - but that doesn't mean the end of the US.

There have always been competing superpowers throughout history, the last 25 years of having just one has been exceptional.

 

[ElasticNinja]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. If someone wants a huge vehicle and they can afford it, I say more power to them.

Look, if people want to cause unnecessary damage they can very well pay for it at the pump and in road tax.

There is no moderate right wing left in the US - the Tea Party and their media proxies (lead by Fox news) have destroyed it.

The Democrats tbh

 

[A.Nonymous]

Look, if people want to cause unnecessary damage they can very well pay for it at the pump and in road tax.

I don't know about causing unnecessary damage, but owners of large SUVs definitely have higher operating costs and there's nothing wrong with that from my book. If car manufacturers can figure out a way to make a large SUV that gets 80 mpg or something then I'm all for that too.

 

[ItnStln511]

Actually, as I mentioned above, the irony is that US car makers produce some pretty good cars .. in the rest of the world. For example, european Fords are actually more reliable than VWs, BMWs and Mercedes.

They're also more fuel efficient.

As part of the US / EU trade deal, the regulations that prevent a lot of Euro-spec cars from being sold (unchanged) in the US could be amended. This would potentially mean that good, well built, more fuel efficient, American cars could be sold in the US.

The problem would be convincing Americans to buy them.

There's no such thing as a panacea

Ford and GM both have nice cars in Europe and Australia. I would love to see some of them come to the US.

What do you expect? The low information voter gets his news from a liberal press hell bent on getting rid of Republicans. We do not read the facts in the press or on the boob tume and so much of what Obama is doing and the effects it will have on this country is never revealed by the press.

So, Duh . . .we end up with an Obama. Not a big surprise there.

Obama will increase welfare spending and when His wife runs on the promise of more free crap and 99% taxes for the rich, she is in. Then Obama will be elected king and I'll move to Germany or perhaps Canada because they have two kids that will enjoy three terms while waiting for daddy's coronation.

I'm glad someone agrees with me!

because the liberal press actually values balance so discusses both sides of an argument.

That's a straight up lie. How about you go educate yourself! Balance and liberal press don't even belong in the same sentence.

,even if the Democrats did offer free crap, how would that be different to the monumental tax cuts the GOP keep promising their supporters? Despite the fact they're forever bleating on about the deficit. That they created. By cutting taxes.

Someone forgets that the democrats had control of both the house and the senate then...sounds to me like someone failed the part in math where they teach you that two-thirds is greater than one-third.

the German economy is the most successful of all the western economies and has been for most of the last 60 years.

I believe that they're number five, but number one in Europe. They really do take care of their county, I'm not going to lie.

If you were to move there you'd see for yourself that all the things - like welfare spending, government financed health care, gun control etc - that Fox news has it's viewers dribbling in fear about, actually work pretty well. There's really nothing to be scared about.

In Germany, you're not constitutionally guarenteed the right to own a gun. As for welfare, I believe that two years is the maximum amount of time you can be on it. If I remember correctly after six months your benefits go down, and then in six month inctiments after that. I could be mistaken, but I think I'm close.

 

[ItnStln511]

Using Fox news as a point in your argument is childish and makes it seem like you're looking down on others.

It must be the fact that Fox News is the only somewhat conservative news company out there. If that's the only comback that they have, it just goes to show that they have no credibility. Besides, I'm sure that all of their information comes from CNN.

 

[ItnStln511]

I don't know about causing unnecessary damage, but owners of large SUVs definitely have higher operating costs and there's nothing wrong with that from my book. If car manufacturers can figure out a way to make a large SUV that gets 80 mpg or something then I'm all for that too.

Hey, drive what you want to drive, and what makes you happy. I personally want another SUV, but I also drive a lot. Now if Chevy was to put a diesel in the Tahoe and it get at least 25 MPG, then SOLD! I refuse to get something like a Prius because I wouldn't enjoy driving that to and from work every day. Since I'm in the market for a car, I have a lot of factors to weigh in. I've been looking at the Subaru Forester and Outback, and am impressed with what they offer.

 

[SiempreTuna]

That's a straight up lie. How about you go educate yourself! Balance and liberal press don't even belong in the same sentence.

Try reading it from time to time. The liberal press categorically does give balanced coverage.

Look at any article in the NYT or New Yorker or any other liberal news source and you'll see balance: putting the other side's POV. Demonstrating that the POV is wrong is also balanced.

Someone forgets that the democrats had control of both the house and the senate then...sounds to me like someone failed the part in math where they teach you that two-thirds is greater than one-third

Factually incorrect. The House of Representatives had a Republican majority when the cuts were passed on June 7, 2001.

So that would make the two thirds Republican.

Further, until James Jefford switched to independent the day before the bill was passed, they'd also controlled the Senate which had been split 50/50 with Cheney having the casting vote.

So, basically, that assertion? Not even close.

In Germany, you're not constitutionally guarenteed the right to own a gun

Another point in their favour.

As for welfare, I believe that two years is the maximum amount of time you can be on it

I think you're talking about unemployment benefit. So far as I can see from a quick google, there is no limit on social security payments.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Hey, drive what you want to drive, and what makes you happy. I personally want another SUV, but I also drive a lot. Now if Chevy was to put a diesel in the Tahoe and it get at least 25 MPG, then SOLD! I refuse to get something like a Prius because I wouldn't enjoy driving that to and from work every day. Since I'm in the market for a car, I have a lot of factors to weigh in. I've been looking at the Subaru Forester and Outback, and am impressed with what they offer.

I kind of want a Prius. I'm not a large vehicle guy. I know I'll never have one though. I can buy a decent 5-10 yr old car for $5k. Why would I spend the $20k+ you need for a used Prius that doesn't have a bajillion miles on it. My current car is anything but sexy. It's 8 yrs old. Has no power locks, power mirrors or power windows. But at 8 yrs old it only has 45k miles on it and it's paid for and reliable. What more could a guy ask for out of a car?

 

[ItnStln511]

I kind of want a Prius. I'm not a large vehicle guy. I know I'll never have one though. I can buy a decent 5-10 yr old car for $5k. Why would I spend the $20k+ you need for a used Prius that doesn't have a bajillion miles on it. My current car is anything but sexy. It's 8 yrs old. Has no power locks, power mirrors or power windows. But at 8 yrs old it only has 45k miles on it and it's paid for and reliable. What more could a guy ask for out of a car?

Right, the Prius is very expensive, even used. And you only average 5,600 miles a year?!?! That's pretty good. I'm trying to find a used Subaru for about $5,000, but they're hard to find...gotta have that manual transmission and all wheel drive!

 

[A.Nonymous]

I didn't buy the car new. Only the idiots and the filthy rich buy new cars IMO. I bought it 2-3 years ago. It had like 7k miles on it when I got it and I put about 1800 on it getting it home. So I've put about 35k on it in since then.

Ok, so you got me curious and I actually looked it up. I bought the thing in October of '09. It had 6,225 miles on it at the time.

 

[ItnStln511]

I didn't buy the car new. Only the idiots and the filthy rich buy new cars IMO. I bought it 2-3 years ago. It had like 7k miles on it when I got it and I put about 1800 on it getting it home. So I've put about 35k on it in since then.

Ok, so you got me curious and I actually looked it up. I bought the thing in October of '09. It had 6,225 miles on it at the time.

I refuse to buy a new car, as they depreciate anywhere from 25% to 40% within the first year. I don't feel losing that much on an investment. Still, that's not too many miles. I average around 15,000 a year.

 

[ItnStln511]

Try reading it from time to time. The liberal press categorically does give balanced coverage.

Look at any article in the NYT or New Yorker or any other liberal news source and you'll see balance: putting the other side's POV. Demonstrating that the POV is wrong is also balanced.

You're extremely misinformed. The liberal media does NOT show both sides of the story. The New York Times doesn't show both sides, much the same way CNN doesn't.

Factually incorrect. The House of Representatives had a Republican majority when the cuts were passed on June 7, 2001.

So that would make the two thirds Republican.

Further, until James Jefford switched to independent the day before the bill was passed, they'd also controlled the Senate which had been split 50/50 with Cheney having the casting vote.

Okay, I was thinking of another issue then. And why should the rich pay a higher PERCENTAGE in taxes? Isn't it as much their country as it is the poor's? Okay, if they are taxed more then they should have a "heavier" vote...after all they are contributing more in taxes, right? It only seems fair. And for the record, I'm not rich, but I believe in equality. Why discriminate on how much a person earns? That's basically what it is. You know if they wanted to tax whites lower than blacks, all hell would break loose.

Another point in their favour.

I pay for both my gun and health insurance. It's my constitutional right to have a gun. Where in the Constitution does it mention health care, let alone say I'm required to have it? Thought not! I'll pay for my gun and health care, you pay for your health care.

I think you're talking about unemployment benefit. So far as I can see from a quick google, there is no limit on social security payments.

Same thing. Sadly in the US we put up with people scamming unemployment.

 

[syi]

You're extremely misinformed. The liberal media does NOT show both sides of the story. The New York Times doesn't show both sides, much the same way CNN doesn't.



Okay, I was thinking of another issue then. And why should the rich pay a higher PERCENTAGE in taxes? Isn't it as much their country as it is the poor's? Okay, if they are taxed more then they should have a "heavier" vote...after all they are contributing more in taxes, right? It only seems fair. And for the record, I'm not rich, but I believe in equality. Why discriminate on how much a person earns? That's basically what it is. You know if they wanted to tax whites lower than blacks, all hell would break loose.



I pay for both my gun and health insurance. It's my constitutional right to have a gun. Where in the Constitution does it mention health care, let alone say I'm required to have it? Thought not! I'll pay for my gun and health care, you pay for your health care.



Same thing. Sadly in the US we put up with people scamming unemployment.

I believe you're misinformed. A flat% income tax IS the fair option. as it stands the wealthy contribute very little to the tax revenue in comparison to the poor and middle class. what's even more wrong is tax brackets screwing over middle class families who would have otherwise had a great time at tax season, had they made slightly less money.

 

[A.Nonymous]

I believe you're misinformed. A flat% income tax IS the fair option. as it stands the wealthy contribute very little to the tax revenue in comparison to the poor and middle class. what's even more wrong is tax brackets screwing over middle class families who would have otherwise had a great time at tax season, had they made slightly less money.

The bolded statement is just not true at all. The wealthy carry the vast majority of the tax burden. Whether they should or shouldn't is another question. The fact is that they do.

 

[SiempreTuna]

You're extremely misinformed. The liberal media does NOT show both sides of the story. The New York Times doesn't show both sides, much the same way CNN doesn't.

I actually read the NYT. I see it showing both sides of the story every day.

In what way can that possibly defined as uninformed or incorrect?

And why should the rich pay a higher PERCENTAGE in taxes?

They don't.

See the GOP's last presidential candidate who paid a maximum of 14% (in the 2 years he chose to publicise: there's no guarantee he paid any tax at all in other years), WAY less than his secretary would have done.

Isn't it as much their country as it is the poor's?

It's very much more their country than the poor's. The entire system is biased in their favour. It's about time everyone else got a fair shake.

Okay, if they are taxed more then they should have a "heavier" vote

Err .. no. It's the US republic not the Roman republic.

What you should have is equality under the law.

after all they are contributing more in taxes

That's because they're benefiting more from society. Ergo, they SHOULD pay more.

but I believe in equality

Err .. did you read what you just wrote?

You clearly do NOT believe in anything approaching equality.

Why discriminate on how much a person earns?

Exactly: why deamonise and disenfranchise the poor because they're poor.

You know if they wanted to tax whites lower than blacks, all hell would break loose

Clearly not: the rich (overwheiming white) pay WAY lower effective tax rates that the poor (which includes a disproportionate number of blacks).

I pay for both my gun and health insurance. It's my constitutional right to have a gun. Where in the Constitution does it mention health care, let alone say I'm required to have it? Thought not! I'll pay for my gun and health care, you pay for your health care.

This is what I don't understand: when laws are clearly absurd and damaging, why not change them?

The US should revoke the 2nd amendment. You could even replace it with one relating to health care.

Same thing. Sadly in the US we put up with people scamming unemployment.

You put up with a minority of people scamming unemployment. Just like you put up with a minority of rich people scamming tax laws.

There will always be criminals. What you do is prosecute them, not abandon the entire system because of them.

 

[syi]

ya...I'll keep my second amendment thank you. dictators want unarmed victims.

 

[SiempreTuna]

Get real, please.

The idea that only thing that stands between the US and dictatorship are a few wackjobs in army surplus with their trusty shootin' irons is arrant nonsense.

You might as well claim you need a gun to defend agains alien invasion: it would make as much sense.

It's a totally bogus argument. Apart from anything else you and your 9mm (or AR15 or whatever) would last a nonsecond against a hellfire missile or a squad of marines.

What's far more likely is that all the guns will turn the country back into the wild west. You already have madmen calling for teachers to carry guns FFS. Take a look at Sudan or Somalia: see how weapons proliferation has worked out for them.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Get real, please.

The idea that only thing that stands between the US and dictatorship are a few wackjobs in army surplus with their trusty shootin' irons is arrant nonsense.

You might as well claim you need a gun to defend agains alien invasion: it would make as much sense.

It's a totally bogus argument. Apart from anything else you and 9mm (or AR15 or whatever) would last a nonsecond against a hellfire missile or a squad of marines.

What's far more likely is that all the guns will turn the country back into the wild west. You already have madmen calling for teachers to carry guns FFS. Take a look at Sudan or Somalia: see how weapons proliferation has worked out for them.

There used to be far more guns in public hands than there are now. The fact is gun ownership is a right in the US, not a privilege. The underlying problem is the culture that glorifies violence in general and gun violence in particular.

 

[sntaylor]

Originally Posted by ItnStln511
Okay, if they are taxed more then they should have a "heavier" vote


They already do, they fund the government to get laws that suit them passed. You need to have money to do this!

 

[ItnStln511]

I believe you're misinformed. A flat% income tax IS the fair option

And I agree.

as it stands the wealthy contribute very little to the tax revenue in comparison to the poor and middle class.

If this is true, I am guessing that it has to do with the wealthy being a smaller