Donald Trump running for president

Otheridstaken

Otheridstaken

Active member
Awards
0
I love how people slam education. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what academia is, and what learning from a textbook is. Research is often done in the university level because it's best equipped to do so.

Since right wingers can't argue against facts, they always attack the education. Rather than come up with research that disputes sociological norms, they attack the socio thinkers. Not even getting the fact their entire ideology was born at the university level.

Stunning indeed.
At no point did I slam education. You have horrible reading comprehension. And you are stuck on the right and left like there is a difference. They play for the same team. They have different viewpoints on things, but they have too. It's necessary to keep people like you blathering nonsense.

I realize you are set in your opinions. Have fun with that.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Gee, don't remember saying people should do any such thing. There are highly educated morons everywhere. However, yes, while doing research on politics, government, etc. for over a half a decade, you're damn right that makes me more qualified to discus the science of politics. You go to school to learn to build race cars, I won't tell you how an engine works.

I didn't say it before, but will now. It's true, those who study something tend to know more about it. Should people listen, well, who knows, depends. I hope people don't go to McDonald cashiers to get advice on how to fix their cars.
Politics and economics are very flexible topics...for example, I doubt you studied in the School of Austrian Economics for example. There are different ways of being bought up in the education system and developing your political ideology. For example, being grown in the public education system and developing in alternative schools such as the Ron Paul institute.

Im all for education, no doubt, but the problem is dogmatism. Your only more qualified to speak for your biased dogmatic beliefs, and that is as far as that goes. You may know your field well, but you dont represent me and alot of people. I mean that respectfully, I dont think your bad because your views are different than mine, and Im sure alot of people are with you too.

Obama, a warmonger, umm, that does make sense. The right wingers are hitting him for not going to war again in Iraq, not going to war Syria, not going to war in old U.S.S.R, and for diplomacy with Iran.

Bush, Republicans, yes, for war. We have a military industrial complex, it gets rich when there are wars. But it's silly to think Obama is part of that when the opposition is complaining he doesn't go to war enough.
I dont care much for what republicans say, this is the problem...I critisize Obama and people think I love Bush. You think people are left and right, and some in the middle. Im neither 3 and not caught up in what they tell you your options are.

Obama has continues to bomb and destroy a large part of the Middle East and North Africa though direct force and creating and fueling civil wars. He obliterated Lybia illegally without consent of congress and has murdered tens of thousands of innocent people with his covert drone program. He has caused instability in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and elsewhere. Obama's drone alone program has murdered more people than the 300 year Spanish Inquisition.

Republicans are not the opposition, in fact Obama is George Bush's 3rd and 4th terms. He only has fueled all the wars in the middle east, and who do you think all those Isis terrorists got their weapons from? Obama has sent for 500 thousand (2014 numbers) tons of weapons to arm "Syrian Rebels" and look all the bloodshed and instability that has caused.

Obama is nothing but a war mongering blood thirsty globalist dictator. He needs to be arrested for treason and crimes against humanity right away.

But oh, he is cool because Republicans think he is weak, lol what a lie. Even if Bush war a bigger war mongering president, a lesser evil is the same evil.

Problem is you think Democrats and Republicans are two separate entities. They are not, they are both sides of the same coin. Its like choosing between coke and pepsi. If you want a real choice go for ginger ale. They are both Keynesian economics mar mongering interventionist police state unconstitutional criminal corrupt parties.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
So Donald Trump says SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE has worked in other countries. This is true,
It can work to a certain extent, certainly will have its flaws. Its been only a short term experiment thus far. What happens if the money runs out and doesnt pay for everything? Do you get awarded in your taxes for opting in a healthier lifestyle? Are organic and nutrition foods as well as health supplements subsidized? Credit for going to the gym? Or do you have to pay for other peoples lifestyle choices such as smoking and drinking?

Can people opt out including doctors? Can people decide what to do with the reaps and benefits of their own labor, and can doctors operate and decide how to charge their own services? Or the goverment doesnt like competition?
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
At no point did I slam education. You have horrible reading comprehension. And you are stuck on the right and left like there is a difference. They play for the same team. They have different viewpoints on things, but they have too. It's necessary to keep people like you blathering nonsense.

I realize you are set in your opinions. Have fun with that.
The NSA should block your IP, you sound like a right wing extremist. I wouldnt be surprised if I found a picture of your child holding a gun in his hand, the world needs to stop and we need a 4 hour long special on CNN about this abuse.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
Back on topic. Trump's debate performance was hilariously bad. I am sure the "angry" Americans will still like him, but he looked like a petulant child.

Overall Fiorina will see a bump and I think Rubio will as well.

Very disappointed in Rand.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Back on topic. Trump's debate performance was hilariously bad. I am sure the "angry" Americans will still like him, but he looked like a petulant child.

Overall Fiorina will see a bump and I think Rubio will as well.

Very disappointed in Rand.
These debates are all just ridiculous personality contests. And why did Trump get over 11 minutes of debate time and Rand under 5 minutes?

I agree Rand didnt look great...I liked how he pointed out the 4th amendment and due process, but I dont think he made himself a good service showing pure brand loyalty (sticking up for the Republicrats) and trying to pick a fight with a monster.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
These debates are all just ridiculous personality contests. And why did Trump get over 11 minutes of debate time and Rand under 5 minutes?

I agree Rand didnt look great...I liked how he pointed out the 4th amendment and due process, but I dont think he made himself a good service showing pure brand loyalty (sticking up for the Republicrats) and trying to pick a fight with a monster.
They are a great show to watch. Trump is a clown, plain and simple.

Rand looked angry and he didn't do well against Christie. He is losing steam very quickly
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
They are a great show to watch. Trump is a clown, plain and simple.

Rand looked angry and he didn't do well against Christie. He is losing steam very quickly
I agree, thats why Im there!

They automatically made Hitlery the front runner...why not say, what if you are running against Bernie?

Carlie Florina showed great professionalism..I just dont agree with her policies but she probably made herself a good push to the average viewer.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
In regards to Trump...he may be well intended, but how do you guys feel about his "Wall Policy." Isnt that dangerous? What if they decide to use that to keep us in instead of its original purpose of keeping them out?

Lets say another illegal war like Vietnam where the draft is put in, you dont think thats a legitimate concern? Should you all want to protect your ability to flee for any reason if needed as a last resort? Good luck if the borders are all walled up.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
I agree, thats why Im there!

They automatically made Hitlery the front runner...why not say, what if you are running against Bernie?

Carlie Florina showed great professionalism..I just dont agree with her policies but she probably made herself a good push to the average viewer.
She looked good and will definitely be in the next top 10 debate with Rand likely falling out.

I disagree with most, I think Jeb and Trump are just there for name value. I think it comes down to Rubio and Walker.

Btw, what kinda of nut is Huckabee? He's a nightmare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ax1
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
At no point did I slam education. You have horrible reading comprehension. And you are stuck on the right and left like there is a difference. They play for the same team. They have different viewpoints on things, but they have too. It's necessary to keep people like you blathering nonsense.

I realize you are set in your opinions. Have fun with that.
Is it pointless to have this conversation? Well I'll try, there isn't one all powerful entity running the parties. Our system is taken over by the powerful, the 1% of the wealthy. But only progressives stand in their way. And only Democrats have been progressive since at the very least Gen. Dwight Eisenhower. Although if Reagan was around today, he would be kind of moderate.

Having said that, you did attack education. At it's very core is research and ideas, when you claim otherwise, it's an attack. Is it expensive, yes, it should be free, just not healthcare.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
It can work to a certain extent, certainly will have its flaws. Its been only a short term experiment thus far. What happens if the money runs out and doesnt pay for everything? Do you get awarded in your taxes for opting in a healthier lifestyle? Are organic and nutrition foods as well as health supplements subsidized? Credit for going to the gym? Or do you have to pay for other peoples lifestyle choices such as smoking and drinking?

Can people opt out including doctors? Can people decide what to do with the reaps and benefits of their own labor, and can doctors operate and decide how to charge their own services? Or the goverment doesnt like competition?
For it to work, you have to regulate destructive forces such as tobacco and other unhealthy choices, for the good of everywhere.

Reason is, we are all already paying for everyone's unhealthy choices.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
It's gonna be John Ellis Bush vs. Hillary Rodman Clinton. Right now, money matters, and they have it. Of the two, Bush may get taken out, but I highly doubt it. Not if history is any judge.
 
Otheridstaken

Otheridstaken

Active member
Awards
0
Is it pointless to have this conversation? Well I'll try, there isn't one all powerful entity running the parties. Our system is taken over by the powerful, the 1% of the wealthy. But only progressives stand in their way. And only Democrats have been progressive since at the very least Gen. Dwight Eisenhower. Although if Reagan was around today, he would be kind of moderate.

Having said that, you did attack education. At it's very core is research and ideas, when you claim otherwise, it's an attack. Is it expensive, yes, it should be free, just not healthcare.
Nope..went through my posts again. I didn't attack education, I attacked YOU being an ignoramus. Education is great, but it was wasted on YOU. YOU have a closed mind and are unable to process new ideas. Just stay stuck in the right- left battle fantasy land.
So yeah, pointless conversation..from the beginning. And using your false reality to call me a liar. Yeah okay.

Peace out hommie.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
For it to work, you have to regulate destructive forces such as tobacco and other unhealthy choices, for the good of everywhere.

Reason is, we are all already paying for everyone's unhealthy choices.
The reason we are already paying for it is because goverment forces us to. This needs to end, its that simple.

We can easily stop paying for everyone else's unhealthy choices. Just abolish the IRS and repeal the 16th amendment. Also abolish Obamacare and medicare of course. People have no right to take other peoples money. Government has no right to force what charity you have to pay and pick pocket the fruits of your own labor. People need to take responsibility for their own choices and not expect to take from others who choose better choices.

So you want to increase billions and perhaps trillions more of our stolen tax dollars on the war on drugs? That doesnt work, prohibition only increases the black market and empowers criminal organizations. Here in New York the heroin crisis is worse than ever, yet it has been illegal for decades, this is just one example. Here in America we have a new crisis of young people smoking chemical alternative marijuanna. It makes people sick and has a hosts of side effect. Regulation often causes people to make alternative and often more dangerous choices which is an issue worldwide. The war on drugs have been an over trillion + dollar complete and total failure in America. Also, goverment has no say in what people should and shouldnt do on their own time as long as they are not infringing on other peoples rights.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Is it pointless to have this conversation? Well I'll try, there isn't one all powerful entity running the parties. Our system is taken over by the powerful, the 1% of the wealthy. But only progressives stand in their way. And only Democrats have been progressive since at the very least Gen. Dwight Eisenhower. Although if Reagan was around today, he would be kind of moderate.

Having said that, you did attack education. At it's very core is research and ideas, when you claim otherwise, it's an attack. Is it expensive, yes, it should be free, just not healthcare.
That 1% finances both parties, there is no difference between Demicans and Republicrats. Progressives or Obama have very little differences with the Bush's. Its a single entity, a monopoly party. They are all pro war, pro domestic police state, pro military industrial complex, pro deparment of education, pro big massive goverment, pro IRS, pro interventionist parties that have petty arguments on how to implement the same system. Just to add, I wouldnt dare compare today's war mongering blood thirsty big business progressives to Eisenhower.

Think of China...they can open a democracy and split the very same people into left and right, or blue and red. All the financing goes to the same people and people vote based on the choices they are given and pushed on them. At the end of the same its the same goverment. They will each take turns saving the country from disaster and people are fooled thinking they have had choice and change all along. People are brainwashed thinking they belong into an elite group thats a separate entity, when in reality they are all one.
 
Dma378

Dma378

Legend
Awards
2
  • Established
  • RockStar
That 1% finances both parties, there is no difference between Demicans and Republicrats. Progressives or Obama have very little differences with the Bush's. Its a single entity, a monopoly party. They are all pro war, pro domestic police state, pro military industrial complex, pro deparment of education, pro big massive goverment, pro IRS, pro interventionist parties that have petty arguments on how to implement the same system. Just to add, I wouldnt dare compare today's war mongering blood thirsty big business progressives to Eisenhower.

Think of China...they can open a democracy and split the very same people into left and right, or blue and red. All the financing goes to the same people and people vote based on the choices they are given and pushed on them. At the end of the same its the same goverment. They will each take turns saving the country from disaster and people are fooled thinking they have had choice and change all along. People are brainwashed thinking they belong into an elite group thats a separate entity, when in reality they are all one.
Great post. And while I share very much of this sentiment, I do lean or favor to the liberalist progressive side of certain "talking points". Only because I'm a global-warming, evolution believing atheist. So the religious divide between the parties is where I make my distinction. Aside from that and the "moral values" aspect of the parties, I completely agree, they are the same. And the country generally plods along the same course regardless of who is in office. Economy rises and falls, one crisis ends and a new begins, one party is deemed a winner for one battle until the next battle they lose, to no real effect or benefit on the country or world as a whole. Our slavery is in the illusion of freedom.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
That 1% finances both parties, there is no difference between Demicans and Republicrats. Progressives or Obama have very little differences with the Bush's. Its a single entity, a monopoly party. They are all pro war, pro domestic police state, pro military industrial complex, pro deparment of education, pro big massive goverment, pro IRS, pro interventionist parties that have petty arguments on how to implement the same system. Just to add, I wouldnt dare compare today's war mongering blood thirsty big business progressives to Eisenhower.

Think of China...they can open a democracy and split the very same people into left and right, or blue and red. All the financing goes to the same people and people vote based on the choices they are given and pushed on them. At the end of the same its the same goverment. They will each take turns saving the country from disaster and people are fooled thinking they have had choice and change all along. People are brainwashed thinking they belong into an elite group thats a separate entity, when in reality they are all one.
Sure, they finance both parties. However, only one has policy that help the everyday guy. There are rich people who know that Social democracies like Netherlands have a great thing going, for all their citizens.

They care about global warming and the planet.

Think about what each party has done. HERE IS A SMALL LIST, also I placed the democrat conservatives policies of the past under Republicans to match ideological leanings now. I understand Lincoln was a Republican, and conservatives used to be Democrats.

REPUBLICANS (conservatives):

....citizens United, allowing unchecked power to buy elections....

....Fought against the forming of the Union, the preservation of the Union, and civil rights, every form along the way....

....fight against mass transit....

....fight against any form of carbon controls....

....fight against healthcare for all.....

....attempt to break up unions....

....torn down voting rights laws....

....attempts to suppress vote of minorities (ever recent study has found scant evidence of fraud, and in no cases would voter ID laws of stopped the fraud)....

....War on Drugs....

....a military industrial complex....

....for profit prisons....


DEMOCRATS (progressives)

....every worker law we have, unions, min wage, child labor, 40 hour work week, benefits, social security, etc....

....Medicaid, Medicare, Obamacare, and Single payer if they would let us....

....the abolition of slavery, civil rights, women's suffered, gay marriage laws, etc...

....railroads....

....FDA....

...highway system, although Republican block attempts to fund upgrading it....

....legislations of banks, which the Republicans are trying to abolished....

....changes to the justice system to reflect fair treatment....

....some states are passing 15 hour min wage, or more, all progressive (if kept up to inflation, min wage would be I high 20's now)....

.,..attempts to regulate oil companies, whom have fought all forms of regulations that would help our environment....


Really, the list goes on and on. Some wealthy donors give to Democrats, but of the two, only one at least moves us in the right direction.

Besides,when Republicans have control, they balloon the deficit.

Under Reagan---first large scale deficits in decades. Massive tax cuts for wealthy.

Under first Bush--more debt from tax cuts for wealthy.

Under CLINTON--balanced budget and went into surplus.

Second Bush--handed a surplus, brought us into massive deficits and a collapsing economy.how, wars and massive tax cuts on the wealthy.

Obama--turns economy around, and has shrunk the deficit to levels not seen since President Clinton was in office.

There is a difference between the parties, and it's big.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Your bitching about Reagan increasing deficits pales in comparison to the deficits that Obama racked up. Even crying that Bush increased the deficit means jack when Obama tripled what Bush dis, under a democrat controlled Congress no less.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
In 2009, the deficit soared after Democrats took control of both houses of Congress. They tripled the highest deficit under Bush. For nearly 4 years, Obama ran a trillion plus dollar deficit. To say he cut it in half means nothing, when it's only half of what he tripled it to. The US government predicts the deficit won't go below Bush's highest until after 2016. That's a far cry from the lowest since Clinton .

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Ask Seattle how that $15/hr is working out, with all those folks being layed off.
http://q13fox.com/2015/04/28/owner-of-pizza-shop-says-new-minimum-wage-law-is-forcing-her-to-close/

Just 1 example.

Again how's Obamacare doing when millions have lost their insurance plan to be FORCED into Obamacare?
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/012715-736559-cbo-says-obamacare-will-push-10-million-of-employer-plans.htm
http://www.healthline.com/health-news/insurance-premiums-on-aca-could-rise-dramatically-next-year-062115

Obamacare rates to increase by double digits next year. Thank gooddness you generous libs gave us Obamacare. I don't k ow what I would have done if my job had kept providing me with FREE insurance.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Sure, they finance both parties. However, only one has policy that help the everyday guy. There are rich people who know that Social democracies like Netherlands have a great thing going, for all their citizens.

They care about global warming and the planet.
Yeah right, income taxes, forcing poor people to buy expensive health care or punish them by means of IRS, letting our Vets rot in hospital basements to die, wasting trillions of tax dollars continuing all the wars, etc....

Devaluing our currency by promoting all those bailouts and printing money out of thing air to artificially pump the economy as well as the resistance to audit the private federal reserve does not help the everyday guy, it hurts them.

This is what both parties support as a whole.

REPUBLICANS (conservatives):

....citizens United, allowing unchecked power to buy elections....
Are your serious? Obama's last election cost over 7 Billion dollars, more than any other election in history. If Democrats dont buy elections, Obama is not a democrat. Obama is a sellout to lobby, although he originally campaigned over and over again he would never take a penny from lobby 8 years ago.

Both parties buy elections, and both parties have unchecked powers (mostly the same) financing these elections.

Fought against the forming of the Union, the preservation of the Union, and civil rights, every form along the way....
Dont make it like Unions are innocent little princesses....

Democrats do NOT fight for civil rights. The democrats have abolished the #1 civil rights doctrine in the world, The Bill of Rights. They shut up freedom of speech, they arrest, imprison and assassinate the press, they allow the bypass of due process including the assassination of Americans, they take our right to bear arms, they spy on us without a warrant, make us fight illegal wars, steal our money and so on.

Progressive Democrats have done nothing but intrude in my civil rights, as well as republicans. Same thing.

....fight against mass transit....
And Democrats hate Uber which is mass transit. They dont like it when the individual competes with their own regulated business. They want to force people to use mass transit of their choosing.

....fight against healthcare for all.....
Sure, Obamacare is modeled after Romney's universal health care in Massachusetts who is a republican.

Republicans love Obamacare especially John Bohner who has made a good financial reap off of it with his stocks. Dont let these silly goverment closures fool you. Its all talk, just like they said they will repeal it before they cleared the house, and then just got silent on it. Behind closed doors its all just business s usual as big lobby influences the policy of both parties.

....War on Drugs....

....a military industrial complex....

....for profit prisons....
Democrats HEAVILY support the war on drugs, are you kidding me? They support the whole entire prison industrial complex too, what are you talking about?

Democrats HEAVILY support the military industrial complex, they have for decades. Obama regime has spent trillions on it.

Those blood thirsty progressive Democrats need to be arrested for crimes against humanity. Unlike them, I support due process and want to give them a day in court in front of a jury.

Really, the list goes on and on. Some wealthy donors give to Democrats, but of the two, only one at least moves us in the right direction.

Besides,when Republicans have control, they balloon the deficit.

Under Reagan---first large scale deficits in decades. Massive tax cuts for wealthy.

Under first Bush--more debt from tax cuts for wealthy.

Under CLINTON--balanced budget and went into surplus.

Second Bush--handed a surplus, brought us into massive deficits and a collapsing economy.how, wars and massive tax cuts on the wealthy.

Obama--turns economy around, and has shrunk the deficit to levels not seen since President Clinton was in office.

There is a difference between the parties, and it's big.
Really, they all have deficits and turn the economy around, they take turns destroying and saving the country.

The differences are petty and minuscule and much what you talked about are little changes within the same system.

They both have little arguments over taxes when they shouldn't even exist in the first place. Both rich and poor get taxed, neither should get taxed, that is a crime agaisnt civil rights.

They both have arguments what countries to destroy, who to kill, how to spy on Americans and bypass due process, support the war on terror, not question 9/11, etc....

Both parties are big goverment military industrial police state blood thirsty war mongers. Both violate our civil liberties and human rights.

Your caught up in a web of silly petty things thinking both parties are two separate entities. Try convincing me how either coke or pepsie is better.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
If you bring up the fact that the sun influences the climate your called a tin foiled conspiracy theorist.

So must these 50 NASA scientists who dont get a second on mainstream news because questioning climate change is bad for business.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-scientists-dispute-climate-change-2012-4
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Back to big spending presidents, they did teach you that Congress spends money, not the President. Reagan had a democrat controlled House, where all spending bills originate according to the Constitution.

Clinton had a Republican majority in Congress that balanced the budget, and left a surplus. Not Clinton.

Bush finished his last 2 years under a democrat controlled Congress, which was when the deficit spending went the highest under Bush. The Democrats controlled both until 2010, and the deficits were over $1 Trillion. Republicans won the house and started trying to reign in spwnding, and Obama's deficits didn't get "cut in half" until after Republicans won the Senate.

So who is the big spender again? That's right, your post even said it. Progressives gave us everything, which costs money we didn't have most of the time.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
So who is the big spender again? That's right, your post even said it. Progressives gave us everything, which costs money we didn't have most of the time.
We always have money, its available on loan from China! Lets not use that money on poor people who are forced to pay for unaffordable health insurance because of Obamacare, lets spend it on the expansion of the IRS who go out to collect that money from them!

Just a rant, excuse me lol
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
Yeah right, income taxes, forcing poor people to buy expensive health care or punish them by means of IRS, letting our Vets rot in hospital basements to die, wasting trillions of tax dollars continuing all the wars, etc....

Devaluing our currency by promoting all those bailouts and printing money out of thing air to artificially pump the economy as well as the resistance to audit the private federal reserve does not help the everyday guy, it hurts them.

This is what both parties support as a whole.



Are your serious? Obama's last election cost over 7 Billion dollars, more than any other election in history. If Democrats dont buy elections, Obama is not a democrat. Obama is a sellout to lobby, although he originally campaigned over and over again he would never take a penny from lobby 8 years ago.

Both parties buy elections, and both parties have unchecked powers (mostly the same) financing these elections.



Dont make it like Unions are innocent little princesses....

Democrats do NOT fight for civil rights. The democrats have abolished the #1 civil rights doctrine in the world, The Bill of Rights. They shut up freedom of speech, they arrest, imprison and assassinate the press, they allow the bypass of due process including the assassination of Americans, they take our right to bear arms, they spy on us without a warrant, make us fight illegal wars, steal our money and so on.

Progressive Democrats have done nothing but intrude in my civil rights, as well as republicans. Same thing.



And Democrats hate Uber which is mass transit. They dont like it when the individual competes with their own regulated business. They want to force people to use mass transit of their choosing.



Sure, Obamacare is modeled after Romney's universal health care in Massachusetts who is a republican.

Republicans love Obamacare especially John Bohner who has made a good financial reap off of it with his stocks. Dont let these silly goverment closures fool you. Its all talk, just like they said they will repeal it before they cleared the house, and then just got silent on it. Behind closed doors its all just business s usual as big lobby influences the policy of both parties.



Democrats HEAVILY support the war on drugs, are you kidding me? They support the whole entire prison industrial complex too, what are you talking about?

Democrats HEAVILY support the military industrial complex, they have for decades. Obama regime has spent trillions on it.

Those blood thirsty progressive Democrats need to be arrested for crimes against humanity. Unlike them, I support due process and want to give them a day in court in front of a jury.



Really, they all have deficits and turn the economy around, they take turns destroying and saving the country.

The differences are petty and minuscule and much what you talked about are little changes within the same system.

They both have little arguments over taxes when they shouldn't even exist in the first place. Both rich and poor get taxed, neither should get taxed, that is a crime agaisnt civil rights.

They both have arguments what countries to destroy, who to kill, how to spy on Americans and bypass due process, support the war on terror, not question 9/11, etc....

Both parties are big goverment military industrial police state blood thirsty war mongers. Both violate our civil liberties and human rights.

Your caught up in a web of silly petty things thinking both parties are two separate entities. Try convincing me how either coke or pepsie is better.
Little changes, tell that to the millions with healthcare, me including. Tell that to the millions who have social security after retirement. Tell that any non-white male who now has protection under the law. I agree, Wall Street holds too much sway in the Democratic Party, but big corporations, big oil especially, holds absolute sway over the Republicans.

Name one democrat candidate that is funded by a single billionaire like Republicans have been doing for two cycles now. Bernie Sanders isn't funded by Sheldon Anderson or the Koch brothers.

I get it, it's easier to blame both parties and wash you hands with it. It's a trick the trick the powerful play. If you see no hope, you won't even try to stop them. Republicans need low turnout elections, because the more fits there are, the less power they have.

The truth is, there are real ideological difference in the two parties.

But you'll never see campaign finance reform coming from Republicans, not anymore.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
I refuse to debate this issue. Some people will seriously see whatever they want. You keep posting these so called credible scientist, but you obviously decided to either ignore and not even bother to check who is funding the research. Are there scientist that believe this isn't man made, sure. But they are few and far between.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
Did you forget how large the deficit was when you republicans handed it to him. Obama has reversed the trends you created, then you dare say, hey look, he has screwed us. Obama is driving the car out of the ditch, your party drove it in the ditch. Stop blaming him.

And he has done it without any help from Republicans. They've shut down gov, got our credit downgraded, etc.

You guys will see whatever you want.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/08/deficits-falling-from-way-up/


You see I can do it too, except I try not to push out biased data.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
We always have money, its available on loan from China! Lets not use that money on poor people who are forced to pay for unaffordable health insurance because of Obamacare, lets spend it on the expansion of the IRS who go out to collect that money from them!

Just a rant, excuse me lol
Why does spending how ways have to mean debt. It's doesn't, it actually means growth. We go in debt when we give the already well to do even more tax breaks.

Since Reagan was President, the top 5% has seen the largest transfer of wealth to them than at any point in our history. They pay the lowest tax rates than they ever have.

Not so ironically, it hasn't TRICKLED DOWN.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Little changes, tell that to the millions with healthcare, me including. Tell that to the millions who have social security after retirement. Tell that any non-white male who now has protection under the law. I agree, Wall Street holds too much sway in the Democratic Party, but big corporations, big oil especially, holds absolute sway over the Republicans.

Name one democrat candidate that is funded by a single billionaire like Republicans have been doing for two cycles now. Bernie Sanders isn't funded by Sheldon Anderson or the Koch brothers.

I get it, it's easier to blame both parties and wash you hands with it. It's a trick the trick the powerful play. If you see no hope, you won't even try to stop them. Republicans need low turnout elections, because the more fits there are, the less power they have.

The truth is, there are real ideological difference in the two parties.

But you'll never see campaign finance reform coming from Republicans, not anymore.
So, if you lived in Republican Massachusetts years ago you would have had the same thing. Its not just a democratic thing. Republicans have a stake in Obamacare as well, like I said John Broner financially profits off it, he does not have and has shown not to have the incentive to get rid of it.

Here is how to get health care to everybody, reverse all the goverment policies from managed care and on from the 70's and revert back to the 50s and 60s. Have family practice medicine where you pay the doctor directly in cash eliminating the costs of goverment bureaucracy. Have real insurance back where you can pay a fee based on risk just in case something bad happens. You cant just force people like me against my free will and take my income from me reducing my own options to do what I need to do with my own money. Eliminate goverment regulation and bureaucracy = reduce costs, eliminate income tax = more money to spend to take care of yourself.

None of that stuff is free. It costs lots of taxes, and the prices increase and currency devales. There are issues that effect everybody because everbody is forced into it against their will The system gets strained. My own SS statement says by 2035 Im only gonna get 73% of whats on the statement.

These little social experiments costs big money, and as currency deflates and prices increase its a matter of time the system goes broke, which it already is in big trouble.

Of course million of people on SS would be ticked if you took away there money, it was stolen from them by force for years. I want to repeal the social security act, but you damn be sure I want my money back that was stolen from me for over 2 decades.

If they are differences like you say they are, thats fine. I can at least without a doubt say that both are evil big goverment criminal war mongering blood thirsty empires. They dont give a crap about you, they just want to pick pocket your money.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Why does spending how ways have to mean debt. It's doesn't, it actually means growth. We go in debt when we give the already well to do even more tax breaks.

Since Reagan was President, the top 5% has seen the largest transfer of wealth to them than at any point in our history. They pay the lowest tax rates than they ever have.

Not so ironically, it hasn't TRICKLED DOWN.
How about let people decide how to spend their own money?

I dont know why your keep using republican policies or historical facts when I obviously hate them (not the voters, just the goverment.)
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
Gee, again, spending and deficits are not the same thing.

Republicans drive debt because they make horrible budget choices and keep giving our largest revenue source massive tax cuts.

Spend in sectors like technology, bio, etc, cause innovation, and helps crest jobs.

Spending in infrastructure helps to create jobs, and drives economic activity.

Spending in healthcare will drive down cost.

Regulating industries that harm the population can save money over the long run.

What doesn't work is massive tax cuts, and deregulation, which only allows big corporations to make choices that are unhealthy for the economy.

I wish things were as simple as you seem to think they are.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Here is some more. But you'll just ignore the mess republicans handed him, it's so easy.


http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/sep/05/barack-obama/obama-says-he-has-cut-national-deficit-half/
Thats a funny little misleading trick they play. Politifact is arguing that the deficit "as a percentage of gdp" was cut in half. That's a completely different argument than the actual dollar figures. Actual dollars spent are a tangible metric, where as percentages have obviously been tweeted to fit the argument, much like Obama's unemployment percentage.

Again you are willfully ignoring the fact that DEMOCRATS running Congress are the ones that ran up the deficit at the end of Bush's term.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I refuse to debate this issue. Some people will seriously see whatever they want. You keep posting these so called credible scientist, but you obviously decided to either ignore and not even bother to check who is funding the research. Are there scientist that believe this isn't man made, sure. But they are few and far between.
Funny you fail to mention all the progressive lefty's funding all the "climate change" studies.

You refuse to argue the point because you cant.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
How about let people decide how to spend their own money?
People can spend their own money, but a functional government, society, and world needs a central authority.

What you talking about is anarchy.

The wealthy have trillions of dollars sitting in banks, etc. why there are millions of poor.

But all these wealthy people, much of that money comes from services the government provides.


Should we police ourself, pick up our own garbage, educate ourselves, build our own armies, etc.

It's utopian to think a system like that would work.

As soon as you dissolve the fed, the another power would fill the vacuum.

So there has to be some revenue source.

It's about how much, and who pays.

Should the working class pay for everything, or should he wealthy.

Stratification must exist, no one is saying it shouldn't. You should be rewarded for being successful. But when the government become a oligarchy, it's starts to mess everything up.

In Finland, they cap CEO pay at 300 times the average employee pay. They have free education, healthcare, etc.

Everyone has these basic needs, so everyone can a shot at being successful.

It's not the case here. Sure, some poor make it out, but the deck is stacked against them.

Even having access to the newest technology is vital. How can a poor kid compete against a kid whose had everything his entire life.

Bottom line is, we live in this system, and in last three decades, we've seen unprecedented growth in inequality.

Social stratification, inequality, classism, systemic racism, these sociological issues easily explain why the current system is failing.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Little changes, tell that to the millions with healthcare, me including. Tell that to the millions who have social security after retirement. Tell that any non-white male who now has protection under the law. I agree, Wall Street holds too much sway in the Democratic Party, but big corporations, big oil especially, holds absolute sway over the Republicans.

Name one democrat candidate that is funded by a single billionaire like Republicans have been doing for two cycles now. Bernie Sanders isn't funded by Sheldon Anderson or the Koch brothers.

I get it, it's easier to blame both parties and wash you hands with it. It's a trick the trick the powerful play. If you see no hope, you won't even try to stop them. Republicans need low turnout elections, because the more fits there are, the less power they have.

The truth is, there are real ideological difference in the two parties.

But you'll never see campaign finance reform coming from Republicans, not anymore.
George Soros donates millions of his dollars to his own Open Society, that then funnels it to every progressive socialist group and agenda out there.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1237

AND he has been accused of tanking the currency of multiple countries.
http://canadafreepress.com/article/soros-republic-enemy-1
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
Funny you fail to mention all the progressive lefty's funding all the "climate change" studies.

You refuse to argue the point because you cant.
You mean academia funds it. Climate Scientist don't side with liberals out of ideological reason, it's because liberals want to take action. Hence why big oil backers like the Koch want to cut off funding to research.

Who has something to gain? Scientist gain nothing for falsifying data.

Big oil gains billions of dollars from the lack of action on climate change.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
George Soros donates millions of his dollars to his own Open Society, that then funnels it to every progressive socialist group and agenda out there.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1237

AND he has been accused of tanking the currency of multiple countries.
http://canadafreepress.com/article/soros-republic-enemy-1
Yes, Soros. So what. Never said we didn't have big money backers. But Soros would be hurt by Progressive policies. He is an ideologue. He doesn't pick a candidate and funnel billions into election.

Not to mention Soros has been relatively quit. The Koch. They are oil men. They make billions from the policies conservative champion.

And lobbying, nothing inherently wrong with it.

Using dark money to buy election, and unchecked system of billionaires buying elections, it's exactly the kind of thing we should not want.

I'd like public ally funded election. Each candidate gets a specific amount, no outside donations. Brake many out of politics completely.

But who stands in the way of that, I bet you can guess.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
People can spend their own money, but a functional government, society, and world needs a central authority.

What you talking about is anarchy.
I dont support anarchy, no way.

Goverment is a used car salesman, and they sold you a old '89 Yugo beater. Individual liberty freedom is Ferrari. Goverments role should be to protect these freedoms, thats it.

I dont know, but I think your a good guy at heart, I honestly say that, but I am shocked when I see people have so much faith and confidence in goverment to take care of people.

I gotta go to bed dude, have a good night.
 

youngandfree

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Gee, again, spending and deficits are not the same thing.

Republicans drive debt because they make horrible budget choices and keep giving our largest revenue source massive tax cuts.

Spend in sectors like technology, bio, etc, cause innovation, and helps crest jobs.

Spending in infrastructure helps to create jobs, and drives economic activity.

Spending in healthcare will drive down cost.


Regulating industries that harm the population can save money over the long run.

What doesn't work is massive tax cuts, and deregulation, which only allows big corporations to make choices that are unhealthy for the economy.

I wish things were as simple as you seem to think they are.
http://www.healthline.com/health-news/insurance-premiums-on-aca-could-rise-dramatically-next-year-062115

Costs are still going up, not down.
 
New_Jedi

New_Jedi

New member
Awards
0
Comparing Soros to the Koch brother is like comparing ice to water. They are sort of alike, but function in a very different way.
 
Matthandyo

Matthandyo

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
ImageUploadedByAnabolicMinds1439258974.039824.jpg
 

Top