One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: working class stiff
Page: <<prev 1 ... 575 576 577 578 579 next>>
Jul 27, 2013 09:01:33   #
Navysnipe wrote:
That there isn't enough talk about cutting the pay of congress, and the senate for the common good, and to help our economy.
There also isn't enough talk about making the president and congress get the same medical coverage we are forced to get under obamacare. Just a thought. I'd appreciate your comments. :-)


I'm not sure that cutting Congresses (and/or Executive branch) pay would do any good. I doubt people run for Congress for the pay.
I would heartily support restrictions on ex-Congress people becoming lobbyists and working for groups with interest in legislation before Congress that they are not a part of. In other words, ban the exes from cashing in on their connections.
Go to
Jul 27, 2013 08:38:45   #
OffGrid9 wrote:
First: In regard to the intent of v**er ID, you're confused. V****g is only a right of American citizens who have not committed felonies and thus lost their right to v**e. The drive to require identification as a prerequisite to v****g is not an attempt to limit the right of American citizens to v**e, be they Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, latino, black, caucasian, asian, male, female, homosexual, or of indeterminate sexual persuasion. PERIOD. It AIN'T a limit on any citizen. But it definitely IS an attempt to prevent non-citizens, dead citizens, and criminals from v****g. So...what's your beef? Are you in favor of allowing non-citizens, dead citizens, and criminals to v**e? Because it turns out that these types of v**ers usually v**e a straight Democratic ticket.

Second, in regard to the practice of jerrymandering, once again, you're confused. You do have a point, the practice of jerrymandering skews the results of e******ns. Here in Washington state, where Democrats have controlled state politics for decades, jerrymandering by Democrats has worked the opposite of what you describe in NC. It's archaic and wrong, but it isn't just Republicans who do it. But you know, whether its the practice of jerrymandering that you h**e, or the e*******l college, you have to realize that we are not a direct democracy. Although we use the model of a REPRESENTATIVE democracy for v****g purposes, we aren't a representative democracy, either. We are a republic, not a democracy. For a quick primer on the difference, try [ www.tmra2.org/images/democracyvsrepublic.pdf ]. It will open your eyes. Maybe you could then read the Declaration of Independence, and understand why it NEVER uses the word "democracy".
First: In regard to the intent of v**er ID, you'r... (show quote)


Not confused. Laws already exist to deal with the restrictions of the right to v**e. Here in NC extensive studies have been done and not one case of v***r f***d was cited. So why is the party of small government passing a law for a non-existant issue? I think the Governor of Pennsylvania gave the game away when he stated that his state's law was meant to deliver Pa. to the Republican nominee.

Point 2: I have no issue with the NC Republican party redrawing the v****g districts. In fact, I pretty much supported the Republican analysis that 100 yrs of Dem rule in the state has led to an easy type of good old boy corruption and the state gov't needed some shaking up. On the other hand, they have gone so far to the right that they do not take into account that half the population disagrees with many of the policies enacted. In fact, they were in such a rush to pass any and all of their laws while they had a veto proof majority that no public hearings were held and once some of the implications of their bills were studied the effects were not what the legislation intended.
Go to
Jul 27, 2013 08:19:25   #
alex wrote:
the only people the republicans are trying to restrict are the dead that keep v****g dumbocrap and all the illiterate that want to v**e seven or eight times


Anything to back that up or is this assertion just a convenient falsehood to justify making it harder for people to exercise a basic American right?
Go to
Jul 26, 2013 18:07:04   #
Thank God. V****g is a right. The attempts by Republicans to limit the right to v**e in states that they control is un-American. In N. Carolina, the Democratic Party received half the v**es and are outnumbered in the legislature by a 2 to 1 margin in the house and senate via jerrymandering.

Only people who support tyranny would think it fair to ignore the concerns of half the population of a state.
Go to
Jul 26, 2013 15:48:09   #
The list is small but we (the US) did turn down offers of help from Canada, France, Iran, and a host of NGOs.

Perhaps it's a case of 'ask and you shall receive'.
Go to
Jul 26, 2013 15:11:52   #
Fair enough. And perhaps 'false f**g' was also a poor choice of words: as you said, the issues are worth discussing. I just wonder how any discussions will take place with some of the rhetoric I hear from both sides.
Go to
Jul 26, 2013 14:54:02   #
Really? That's what your worried about?

Talk about paranoid. No wonder conservatives are so scared of the President. You build a house of mirrors and when you see the reflection you get scared.

Not to worry though. In 2017 you'll have a new President.
But if it's not a Republican, you'll have to build a whole new house of mirrors.
Go to
Jul 26, 2013 14:23:44   #
bayman wrote:
I think it's time to bail on AARP. AMAC is a good conservative alternative.


To each his own. But just because the AARP does not share your political views does not mean it h**es seniors. It does not follow that those who disagree with your politics h**e anybody.

This sort of arguing is guaranteed not to elicit any rational response....just the sort of "I know you are by what am I' retort you've just seen. It is partly your fault for raising a false f**g.
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 18:33:51   #
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-second-bush-era-gun-smuggling-probe-202043091.html

from the article:
"Emails obtained by The Associated Press show how in a 2007 investigation in Phoenix, agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — depending on Mexican authorities to follow up — let guns "walk" across the border in an effort to identify higher-ups in gun networks. Justice Department policy has long required that illicit arms shipments be intercepted whenever possible.

The 2007 probe operated out of the same ATF office that more recently ran the flawed Operation Fast and Furious. Both probes resulted in weapons disappearing across the border into Mexico, according to the emails. The 2007 probe was relatively small — involving over 200 weapons, just a dozen of which ended up in Mexico as a result of gun-walking. Fast and Furious involved over 2,000 weapons, some 1,400 of which have not been recovered and an unknown number of which wound up in Mexico".

Fast and Furious was not an Obama administration program. I agree he should have stopped it, but blaming him for the program is counter-factual.
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 18:18:10   #
BTW Crazy Horse

I get your point about Sen. Sensenbrenner's objection. But it seems like it comes with the territory. The Congress has ceded much of it's national security concerns to the Executive branch. It's going to be hard to squeeze that toothpaste back into it's tube.
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 18:11:46   #
Yeah, I know. When Obama does it it's different, or better yet, illegal. But you guys didn't really get to the nub of the matter. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. That's what conservatives said.

Just out of curiosity...what is the meaning of the "quid pro quo" often used in responses on this site?
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 18:04:52   #
It's not a given that all costs are passed on to the consumer. A company may decide that selling more volume at a lesser profit margin may maximize their profits.

The old Henry Ford-Model T example.
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 17:29:48   #
Funny thing.....
When the PATRIOT Act was first passed and liberals objected to it, the conservatives responded that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. The law was necessary for national security.

Now the conservatives are raising the same objections they rerided liberals for.
curiouser and curiouser.
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 17:09:27   #
God requires pat-downs?
Go to
Jul 25, 2013 17:05:11   #
My politicians? They don't listen to me.
However, I do try to see both sides of an issue and like many public policy issues, the minimum wage question is more complex than just one side is wrong and the other right. Your first link didn't do anything for me. The second one was informative. I do know that basic capitalist economic theory leads one to think that raising the cost of labor would drive down demand. But study after study shows the results more ambiguous...there are many reasons why

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/14/why-economists-are-so-puzzled-by-the-minimum-wage/
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 575 576 577 578 579 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.