The Future is Bright

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
Back to the premise of the post...America gave The Obama a chance and two years later, they provided direct feedback on his performance.

I knew we would get the same old posters with the same old tactics..."spend, spend, spend" is a classic.

I feel sorry for you all but, I understand you have no choice but, to ride this horse. Good luck with that.

Obama's mistake was trying to compromise with the Republicans when he first took office. I understand that you do not understand the concept of spending money to make money. We need bridges and roads fixed. We need the infrastructure fixed. Why not give tax breaks to companies who are willing to hire workers to do the jobs. Now, you do understand that it will cost money to fix the infrastructure right? Where is that money coming from if you will not spend? Now, we put people back to work and they pay taxes. Plus they get off some of the entitlemement programs they are on now.
What is your plan to get people back to work? The private sector ain't doing it. Theyare perfectly happy to send the jobs out of the country and reward themselves with big bonuses.
So yes, I say spend, spend, spend but in the right places.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Rachel Maddow had a great show last night (just stopped when I saw the subject matter, I rarely watch her show) that talked about two difficult situations for leading republican candidates, especially Perry and Bachmann (who will flame out, IMO). Perry with his religious benefactors and connections, and Bachmann with her campaigning on cutting spending and being against the stimulus and sending in more than a half dozen letters on behalf of stimulus grants. This is something that really needs to be highlighted, IMO - conservative legislators that voted and campaigned against the stimulus and big government being job killers, while lobbying for that stimulus cash for their own districts specifically BECAUSE that government spending will CREATE jobs.

They hypocrisy is worth a long look. I believe Ron Paul and Mitch McConnell were on that same list for their districts, for what it's worth.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
What is your plan to get people back to work? The private sector ain't doing it. Theyare perfectly happy to send the jobs out of the country and reward themselves with big bonuses.
Yup, CEO's are usually awarded big bonuses for increasing profits, but how are they doing it? Most are doing it by exporting or eliminating jobs. Anyone without a conscience can do that.

Recently, Duff's posted a couple of good examples of American companies that have shown REAL leadership. One was Lincoln Electric. I don't remember the name of the other; I believe it was a steel company.
 
A

azbob

Guest
Looks like the viewpoints are about 5 to 1 against me...if you guys get a few more posters the odds might get close to even.

Sponge (an appropriate name for your viewpoint), the government has enough money. They can redistribute the money they already have and with any leadership at all from The Obama, I agree they could do some of the things in your post.

Duff...your numbers are wrong again, The Obama has 18 months left in office. (Hint: if the number is over ten, use your toes)

Stevie...the man that The Obama picked to head up his jobs initiative (Jeffrey Immelt) moved the entire GE radiology division to China AFTER his appointment. Isn't The Obama one of the CEO's that you hate?

To all (Stevie you will have to get someone to explain this to you). Here is a secret. Most Americans know they will not get a perfect president. Bush was very religious as is Perry. We managed to get through eight years without a change in the consitution, with reasonable Supreme Court picks and without God coming up everyday. That's why most can live with Perry.

Liberals can't get past a single issue (select one of many) and that is why The Obama will not have the scope of support for his second term as he did in 2008. Since he was also so inexperienced and naive, he over-promised. If you don't want to accept he is one of the worse presidents ever, at least you have to acknowledge he is one of the worse leaders ever.

Because of all of that, The Future is Bright.
 
A

azbob

Guest
If you accept the fact that these are not absolutes...the left is made up of far more indvidual groups or constituencies. Those range by race, by religion, minority specific issues, viewpoint on specific social issues (you can break those down by gay rights, reproduction rights, welfare, healthcare, etc) and then other individual single-issue groups/voters.

Given the Repbulican have some division (now more well defined and well known with the Tea Party) but, they have always been able to come together because "their guy was a better choice than the other guy." This was especially true for the Bush v Gore race.

Demos came together behind The Obama in a similar way but, that was unusual if you look at history. Typically, those voters will stay home if "their guy" does not support their special interest.

My belief is The Obama has all but lost the far left, blacks and Hispanics. That doesn't mean he will not win the majority of the black vote (98% to the O)but, that pie will be much, much smaller. The far left typically will not turn out and he has done serious damage to the Hispanic vote (67% to the O) because of his lack of support for the Dream Act and the fact that he made specific promises to them that have not been kept re: immigration reform.

If I wanted a demo in the WH for the next four years, I would be backing a competitive primary. As you probably know, when the incumbent is involved in primary battle, that party usually losses the general election. That's why I don't think there is anyway for the demos to avoid the doomsday scenario for, probably at least two years of WH/Congress majority.
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
assbob, you are completely confused as to what a liberal is. You've fallen into the stereotype trap, defining liberals by the specific interests of some minority group which votes for liberals.

We are not all minorities, welfare recipients, gays, or any other definition. Most of us are middle America, working the same jobs, raising the same families, pursuing the same dreams as any right winger. We're the children of immigrants, mostly European. We settled the West, built industries, made scientific discoveries, and paid our taxes. Some of us are Medal of Honor recipients, some of us are billionaires, some of us have vanquished serious diseases.

We are no more all Al Sharpton than you are all Sarah Palin.

So, before you again paint all of us with your monochrome paintbrush, here, learn what a liberal is. If you can understand what we are, you might want to become a liberal too.

Unless you don't like what we believe.



liberal

?adjective
1.
favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2.
( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3.
of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4.
favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5.
favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6.
of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7.
free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8.
open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9.
characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10.
given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11.
not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12.
of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
 
Last edited:

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,542
230
63
Bowling Green Ky
Looks like the viewpoints are about 5 to 1 against me...if you guys get a few more posters the odds might get close to even.

Sponge (an appropriate name for your viewpoint), the government has enough money. They can redistribute the money they already have and with any leadership at all from The Obama, I agree they could do some of the things in your post.

Duff...your numbers are wrong again, The Obama has 18 months left in office. (Hint: if the number is over ten, use your toes)

Stevie...the man that The Obama picked to head up his jobs initiative (Jeffrey Immelt) moved the entire GE radiology division to China AFTER his appointment. Isn't The Obama one of the CEO's that you hate?

To all (Stevie you will have to get someone to explain this to you). Here is a secret. Most Americans know they will not get a perfect president. Bush was very religious as is Perry. We managed to get through eight years without a change in the consitution, with reasonable Supreme Court picks and without God coming up everyday. That's why most can live with Perry.

Liberals can't get past a single issue (select one of many) and that is why The Obama will not have the scope of support for his second term as he did in 2008. Since he was also so inexperienced and naive, he over-promised. If you don't want to accept he is one of the worse presidents ever, at least you have to acknowledge he is one of the worse leaders ever.

Because of all of that, The Future is Bright.

Its aways the same people Bob --
Its a matter of values--and who one identifies with.
Liberals have one main main prob--they are always running out of someone elses money --and if someones mentions balanced budget they are labeled terrorist. :)

If they weren't so amusing I wouldn't waste my time :lol:
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
I feel sorry for you all but, I understand you have no choice but, to ride this horse. Good luck with that.
Kinda like that horse you rode for 8 years, eh Bob?

Watch... now Bob's going to tell us he's an Independent and didn't vote for Bush. But he can't wait until a Republican gets back in, ANY Republican.

Too funny, Bob.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
What is your plan to get people back to work? The private sector ain't doing it. Theyare perfectly happy to send the jobs out of the country and reward themselves with big bonuses.
Kinda like what's going on at Verizon right now, Stevie. More than 6 weeks ago, Verizon put a list of 100 wage and benefit concessions on the table for the employees of it's land line and FiOS divisions. Since then, Verizon's refused to bargain with the union and so 45,000 CWA workers at Verizon are on strike.

Now keep in mind, this is the same company (Verizon) that made more $10 Billion in profits last year and almost $7 Billion in profits in the first half of this year. I guess Verizon figures, hey, if it worked in the public sector, why not here in the private sector too?

And so it goes... the deliberate and orchestrated attack on the middle-class continues, all in the pursuit of ever-increasing profits. When the middle-class is gone they'll realize, too late of course, that they killed the golden goose.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
Bob, forgive because I am stupid but you say that the country gave Obama two years of a Democratic Congress to get us out of this mess. But then they said they did not like what he was doing and voted Republicans in. I believe you say that a couple of times in this thread. But why did we vote to give Bush a Democratic Congress after 6 years Republicans? Is it possinle thet the people where not satiisfied in the direction they were taking us?
 
A

azbob

Guest
Duff...I led my note with "these are not absolutes" but, I wouldn't expect you to understand what that means...hence your comment.

Stevie...sorry but, I can't write every note so the lowest common denominator can understand it.

Trench...I have voted for the Liberatarian candidate for three elections. As soon as The Obama does something positive (can you name anything) I'll be able to rate him versus others. Meanwhile, worse leader ever will do. And to answer your question, I would vote for Bush over The Obama if there were only two choices based on what I know today.

Dogs...you are so right although "spend, spend, spend" doesn't present much of a challenge.

The Future Remains Bright.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
Trench...I have voted for the Liberatarian candidate for three elections. As soon as The Obama does something positive (can you name anything) I'll be able to rate him versus others. Meanwhile, worse leader ever will do. And to answer your question, I would vote for Bush over The Obama if there were only two choices based on what I know today.
Bob, if you consider yourself an Independent, one who's voted Libertarian (3 times), why are you so hell-bent on getting the Republicans back in power?

How did you vote in other general elections? Surely you're old enough to have voted in more than three.

Btw... If you want my voting record, I'll be happy to give it.
 
A

azbob

Guest
I voted for the candidate that I felt would best serve the country (or locality) until I discovered that lifetime politicians aren't really going to Washington to serve...they are going for dozens of other reasons none of which have anything to do with me.

I do recall voting for Humphrey and the first Bush. Early on, I worked for John Anderson.

I've said before, I don't hate The Obama but, I hate where the country is at today and I am convinced that my views and perspectives would better be represented by a republican president and congress.

As people (or at least me) get older, they are still as considerate and caring of others and, at least, just as generous. The difference is I will make the decisions about who I help and where my money goes rather than having the government re-distribute it based on special interests, under the table payments and political correctness.
 

Trampled Underfoot

Registered
Forum Member
Feb 26, 2001
13,593
164
63
As people (or at least me) get older, they are still as considerate and caring of others and, at least, just as generous. The difference is I will make the decisions about who I help and where my money goes rather than having the government re-distribute it based on special interests, under the table payments and political correctness.

I beg to differ with that statement. When you get older and start to make your money, quite a few people lose respect for those that are either unable to make their money for whatever the reason. Just look at this board. It's sickening.

However, lets assume that you are correct. Do you honestly think that if the government stayed out of these programs that the poor or handicapped would get even 5% of the help they get now? The answer is no.
 

bleedingpurple

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 23, 2008
22,494
304
83
52
Where it is real F ing COLD
I guess I am at the breaking point of not giving a fuck anymore! I hate em all and this thread title is really fucked as well.

"The future is bright." :mj07:

I can only imagine how bright the nation's future will be if Michelle Bachman became president.

Top Priority:
Let's establish a national "sexual dysfunction" institute and teach them "gays" to become straight. While we are at it, let's discredit Charles Darwin, hey maybe we can get him out of school text books as well, and let's shove creationism down everyone's throat until they believe.

On a side note, since you are cutting down intelligence levels of the lefty leaners, I think there should be a challenge here, let's take the top 5 Bush Supporters and the Top 5 Democrat Supporters from this board.. Give an IQ test to all and see which side wins.

I think Vegas Odds would have

Duff, Tramp, Chad, Shawn, and Stevie at - 280 compared to

Azz, DTB, Skul, Hedgie, and SSD... SSD would give a good run for the money. If you had Ray instead of SSD the odds would be - 400.
 
Last edited:

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
I guess I am at the breaking point of not giving a fuck anymore! I hate em all and this thread title is really fucked as well.

"The future is bright." :mj07:

I can only imagine how bright the nation's future will be if Michelle Bachman became president.

Top Priority:
Let's establish a national "sexual dysfunction" institute and teach them "gays" to become straight. While we are at it, let's discredit Charles Darwin, hey maybe we can get him out of school text books as well, and let's shove creationism down everyone's throat until they believe.

On a side note, since you are cutting down intelligence levels of the lefty leaners, I think there should be a challenge here, let's take the top 5 Bush Supporters and the Top 5 Democrat Supporters from this board.. Give an IQ test to all and see which side wins.

I think Vegas Odds would have

Duff, Tramp, Chad, Shawn, and Stevie at - 280 compared to

Azz, DTB, Skul, Hedgie, and SSD... SSD would give a good run for the money. If you had Ray instead of SSD the odds would be - 400.

Sorry but where do I come off being an Obama supporter? I have said he is running a third George Bush Term. Can't I dislike both Bush and Obama?:shrug:
 
Last edited:

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
I voted for the candidate that I felt would best serve the country (or locality) until I discovered that lifetime politicians aren't really going to Washington to serve...they are going for dozens of other reasons none of which have anything to do with me.

I do recall voting for Humphrey and the first Bush. Early on, I worked for John Anderson.

I've said before, I don't hate The Obama but, I hate where the country is at today and I am convinced that my views and perspectives would better be represented by a republican president and congress.

As people (or at least me) get older, they are still as considerate and caring of others and, at least, just as generous. The difference is I will make the decisions about who I help and where my money goes rather than having the government re-distribute it based on special interests, under the table payments and political correctness.
Fair enough, Bob. But if you've voted Libertarian in three general elections, I'm curious why you feel none of the current Libertarian candidates can best serve the country?

And of course, the obvious question is why you feel the Republicans can best serve the country now, given the abject failures of the Bush Administration. Believe me, I understand being less than impressed with Obama's performance but why is a self-proclaimed Independent like yourself so convinced the Republicans have suddenly discovered the fountain of wisdom and knowledge?
 
Last edited:

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
I don't hate The Obama but, I hate where the country is at today and I am convinced that my views and perspectives would better be represented by a republican president and congress.

Two questions, azzbob.

What are two or three of the things you hate the most?

How, why and when did those things happen?


No....hating having a black President doesn't count.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top