The W
Views: 99013096
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.9.14 1646
The W - Current Events & Politics - You might be a right wing extremist if..... (Page 3)
This thread has 12 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.95
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
(241 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (57 total)
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
#41 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.93
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by Nuclear Winter
      But if you're of the conservative mindset, the stimulus was instituted under false pretenses.


    "False pretenses" and "misguided philosophy" are NOT the same thing. The former is a lie. The latter is a disagreement. You, in one sentence, have reduced the Bush administration's Iraq Crusade to just another "liberal vs conservative" disagreement as opposed to the massive assault on human rights and America's image that it was.




Just out of curiosity, how long are we going to beat the Iraqi Dead Horse?
The discussion is/was about spending outrageously when you don't need to.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 37 days
Last activity: 37 days
#42 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.20
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
        Originally posted by Nuclear Winter
        But if you're of the conservative mindset, the stimulus was instituted under false pretenses.


      "False pretenses" and "misguided philosophy" are NOT the same thing. The former is a lie. The latter is a disagreement. You, in one sentence, have reduced the Bush administration's Iraq Crusade to just another "liberal vs conservative" disagreement as opposed to the massive assault on human rights and America's image that it was.




    Just out of curiosity, how long are we going to beat the Iraqi Dead Horse?
    The discussion is/was about spending outrageously when you don't need to.


... which Nuclear Winter tried to justify criticizing by saying it is wrong on the same grounds that occupying Iraq was wrong. That, of course, makes no sense.

Also, I don't know how you can consider Iraq a "dead horse" considering it's still ongoing. Is it no longer a political issue, despite the fact that US troops are still there? I didn't realize Bush being gone means the US' presence there is no longer to be questioned or ridiculed.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 17.4.09 1804)
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
#43 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.93
My point was, we were talking about spending, and of course, it's "BUT BUSH......." It's a dead fucking horse. Every time a valid criticism for our new leader is brought up, somebody says "But Bush.......!" Were we misled? Yep, but that's not the conversation.
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 10 hours
AIM:  
#44 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
Well in this case you have to ask what was the reasoning behind the spending, which of course is the state the economy has been in and that does have something to do with Bush's time in office, the degree of which varies of course depending on which side you're talking to.

And maybe it's just me, because I'm no economic expert and I certainly don't love that we've spent so much, but it kinda sorta looks like it's starting to have a positive impact. Whether we needed to spend to get out of this or not is certainly not something you can state factually either way, so it's not like there was no way to justify doing so.

That's not to say I think people should keep blaming Bush, I'm for moving on and trying to get it fixed rather than dwelling on what the previous guy did and it's not like it was all his fault either. But I think the criticism of Obama comes across as though some people think they know exactly what we SHOULD do to fix it, like there's a perfect sure fire answer, and clearly that isn't the case.
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
#45 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.93
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    Well in this case you have to ask what was the reasoning behind the spending, which of course is the state the economy has been in and that does have something to do with Bush's time in office, the degree of which varies of course depending on which side you're talking to.

    And maybe it's just me, because I'm no economic expert and I certainly don't love that we've spent so much, but it kinda sorta looks like it's starting to have a positive impact. Whether we needed to spend to get out of this or not is certainly not something you can state factually either way, so it's not like there was no way to justify doing so.

    That's not to say I think people should keep blaming Bush, I'm for moving on and trying to get it fixed rather than dwelling on what the previous guy did and it's not like it was all his fault either. But I think the criticism of Obama comes across as though some people think they know exactly what we SHOULD do to fix it, like there's a perfect sure fire answer, and clearly that isn't the case.


Well, by that logic, the housing crisis was because of the community reinvestment act (or whatever it was called) that was passed and pushed HARD by the Clinton Administration.

And, history shows, you can't spend your way out of financial problems. It just doesn't make sense.
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 46 min.
#46 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.48
You can't spend your way out but you can prop things up and allow for things to improve.

And the war in Iraq is relevant to this. It has cost a fortune with a lot left to be spent and as opposed to other major conflicts we weren't asked to sacrfice and suck it in. Right now, we need to focus on solutions and setting things up to prevent this from happening again.



Perception is reality
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
#47 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.93
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    You can't spend your way out but you can prop things up and allow for things to improve.

    And the war in Iraq is relevant to this. It has cost a fortune with a lot left to be spent and as opposed to other major conflicts we weren't asked to sacrfice and suck it in. Right now, we need to focus on solutions and setting things up to prevent this from happening again.


The new administration has spent more so far just in stimulus money than the entire Iraq war has cost. PLUS tripling the budget on top of that.

Its a recipe for disaster.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 37 days
Last activity: 37 days
#48 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.20
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by DrDirt
      You can't spend your way out but you can prop things up and allow for things to improve.

      And the war in Iraq is relevant to this. It has cost a fortune with a lot left to be spent and as opposed to other major conflicts we weren't asked to sacrfice and suck it in. Right now, we need to focus on solutions and setting things up to prevent this from happening again.


    The new administration has spent more so far just in stimulus money than the entire Iraq war has cost. PLUS tripling the budget on top of that.

    Its a recipe for disaster.


Yes, but that is domestic money, not money being spent on invading other countries on a whim. Just because it spends more doesn't mean it's worse (or even comparable). Even money spent internationally but with some kind of actual purpose that benefits more than the president and his cronies (and that's certainly not a very high standard) would be more justifiable than a single cent that has gone into occupying Iraq.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 17.4.09 2111)
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 10 hours
AIM:  
#49 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
(deleted by wmatistic on 17.4.09 0712)
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 46 min.
#50 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.46
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by StaggerLee
        Originally posted by DrDirt
        You can't spend your way out but you can prop things up and allow for things to improve.

        And the war in Iraq is relevant to this. It has cost a fortune with a lot left to be spent and as opposed to other major conflicts we weren't asked to sacrfice and suck it in. Right now, we need to focus on solutions and setting things up to prevent this from happening again.


      The new administration has spent more so far just in stimulus money than the entire Iraq war has cost. PLUS tripling the budget on top of that.

      Its a recipe for disaster.


    Yes, but that is domestic money, not money being spent on invading other countries on a whim. Just because it spends more doesn't mean it's worse (or even comparable). Even money spent internationally but with some kind of actual purpose that benefits more than the president and his cronies (and that's certainly not a very high standard) would be more justifiable than a single cent that has gone into occupying Iraq.

    (edited by TheBucsFan on 17.4.09 2111)


I don't like this either. And I suspect the president doesn't either. In spite of what Rush, Beck, and Hannity say. At least with alot of the bailout money there is a chance we can get some or most of it back. The Iraq war was just money down a rathole.

Just a question. Instead of spending all this defense spending in the Middle East to allow for the "free flow of oil at market prices", what if we had spent those billions on alternative energy and efficiency over the last 25 years? And I don't mean not dealing with terrorists, I mean a war that wasn't about terror but about overthrowing the regime in Iraq.



Perception is reality
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
#51 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.93
How are "we" going to get the money back? Where's it going to come from? Do you think 8 or 9 TRILLION dollars is going to come from just the top 5% earners in the population?
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#52 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.97
    Originally posted by DrDirt


    Just a question. Instead of spending all this defense spending in the Middle East to allow for the "free flow of oil at market prices", what if we had spent those billions on alternative energy and efficiency over the last 25 years? And I don't mean not dealing with terrorists, I mean a war that wasn't about terror but about overthrowing the regime in Iraq.


what if.... we stopped spending money on bullshit that is not constitutionally allowed for the federal government to spend, allowed the people who earned the money to keep it and let the market take its course? What if..... we had overthrown Hitler's regime in 1935, instead of waiting for him to build the most powerful army in the world by 1939 and allowing him to kill more than 1/2 of a single race on the earth. I can do rhetorical questions too.

Doc, I like you a lot, but for you, these are some not so great rhetorical questions.



We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.


“That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy” - Swift

DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 46 min.
#53 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.46
    Originally posted by AWArulz
      Originally posted by DrDirt


      Just a question. Instead of spending all this defense spending in the Middle East to allow for the "free flow of oil at market prices", what if we had spent those billions on alternative energy and efficiency over the last 25 years? And I don't mean not dealing with terrorists, I mean a war that wasn't about terror but about overthrowing the regime in Iraq.


    what if.... we stopped spending money on bullshit that is not constitutionally allowed for the federal government to spend, allowed the people who earned the money to keep it and let the market take its course? What if..... we had overthrown Hitler's regime in 1935, instead of waiting for him to build the most powerful army in the world by 1939 and allowing him to kill more than 1/2 of a single race on the earth. I can do rhetorical questions too.

    Doc, I like you a lot, but for you, these are some not so great rhetorical questions.


AWA, maybe not great but what if we as a country and our leadership made and kept long-term visions/goals, etc. We inadvertantly keep creating problems we can avoid. We usually have good intentions but we are unable, unwilling, or refuse to accept the unintended consequences of what we as a nation do. The question is really, if in spite of prices or market forces, we positioned ourselves through a strong committment to gaining energy independence, would our military have to keep going around the world and being maimed and killed to support our dependence on foreign oil. I am not being isolationist, but we have to quit sacrifing or military personnel for things we could have corrected if we tried. Winston Churchill once said (and I'm paraphrasing)that America always does what's right after we have exhausted all other options.

StaggerLee. I am talking TARP money and such, not the stimulus package.

(edited by DrDirt on 17.4.09 1314)


Perception is reality
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 37 days
Last activity: 37 days
#54 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.20
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    what if.... allowed the people who earned the money to keep it and let the market take its course?


Aren't we living in the answer to this question? The president who just left office argued this, and he turned a record surplus into a record deficit. A record surplus that was attained in the wake of his father and Reagan doing the same thing.
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
#55 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.50
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    Right now, we need to focus on solutions and setting things up to prevent this from happening again.


There's a white paper floating around (I don't have the time to find it at the moment - I'll try this evening) that concludes that if the federal government invested in significant upgrade to the internet infrastructure of just California, both in terms of bandwidth and access, the upgrade would pay for itself in ONE year.

I'm not talking about the government acting as a service provider - just infrastructure.

    Originally posted by AWArulz
    what if.... allowed the people who earned the money to keep it and let the market take its course?


Even the former Federal Reserve chair Alan Greenspan has admitted that he may have "found a flaw" in that kind of market self-regulation.




We all have ways of coping. I use sex and awesomeness.
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 46 min.
#56 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.44
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by AWArulz
      what if.... allowed the people who earned the money to keep it and let the market take its course?


    Aren't we living in the answer to this question? The president who just left office argued this, and he turned a record surplus into a record deficit. A record surplus that was attained in the wake of his father and Reagan doing the same thing.


The trouble is that big business has shown time and time again that is needs and MUST have regulation and oversight. Rules and regulations don't just happen for the hell of it but in response to something.

I know there are alot of w's here that don't like unions but they happened in response to some bad things. And then they (many of them)became like the thing they were fight.



Perception is reality
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#57 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.97
    Originally posted by DrDirt

    The trouble is that big business has shown time and time again that is needs and MUST have regulation and oversight. Rules and regulations don't just happen for the hell of it but in response to something.



I didn't say don't regulate them. I said stop taxing them at the highest rate in the world. The federal government is constitutionally enable to "regulate interstate commerce" and to "provide for the common defense" - I am for regulation in some areas. I am not for price controls or cheating in favor of some businesses because of some perceived need.



We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.


“That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy” - Swift

Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Thread rated: 4.95
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Thread ahead: What do the Republicans have to do?
Next thread: Arlen Specter (D-Pennsylvania)?
Previous thread: Pirates
(241 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
My intial reaction to this of course was "Geez, maybe the Giants can offer him a contract. He is probably better than most the roster." Phil Odd
The W - Current Events & Politics - You might be a right wing extremist if..... (Page 3)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.137 seconds.