RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


popeye1250 -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/7/2010 4:43:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Tell me again how you're an "Independant" Popeye?


Mike, I'm an Independant. That doesn't mean I don't want to see the demise of the Republicans or especially Democrat parties though.




servantforuse -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 6:04:46 AM)

Bart Stupak ( D ) MI, will not seek reelection. Nothing for the dems to worry about ?




pahunkboy -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 6:19:11 AM)

Go back to sleep.

Everything is peachy doory.


!!!

People are BLISS.   ...and the threats to congressmen over that certain vote- some lone nut.  In no way reflective of the masses.


Wanna buy a bridge?




xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 8:12:03 AM)


This comment seems to describe the folks on either side of this board well enough.

Actually, at least to me, it seems this country has an ever growing sense of divide; and I suppose that's good for the bad guys, whoever they are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
Just another ridiculous post made by a man unable to accurately view the landscape and who is blinded by his political affiliations.





LaTigresse -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 8:15:55 AM)

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.




xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 8:25:15 AM)

[sm=applause.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.


Vote Libertarian... (Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative)




LaTigresse -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 8:33:47 AM)

I vote for individuals. Regardless of party affiliation.

I feel responsible to take the time to investigate each person's track record, what their important issues are, and make my decision that way. Independent thinking and all that rot.[:D]




Mercnbeth -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 9:21:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.


Unfortunately LaTigresse, we are in the minority thinking they should not only be worried, but should be trying to offer the people an alternative to the status quo. However that's not what the people want based upon the comments made on these boards. When "Bush did it!" or "The Republicans did it!" are posted as acceptable justification for actions and policy. Obviously it points out the reality that both political parties are the same. The bigger problem is the rationalized hypocrisy of judgment based on political party affiliation insures that the party faithful can be used and counted on to insure perpetuation of the status quo everyone claims to detest. As if we just had another Democrat, or another Republican, the 'right one' it would be okay.

The philosophy is exhibited by the mistaken belief that there isn't and can't be a 'right one' who isn't a member of the party I identify; there surely can't be one representing the party I've been indoctrinated to loath. It holds true not only with people running for office, but the source of policies and positions. To be against the health care Law required bigotry, racism, elitism, acceptance of corporate greed, or simply hatred of President Obama. Being against it because it's too expensive, too bureaucratic, and fundamentally doesn't solve any of the problems it was supposed to solve; is not possible.

Therefore the status quo will continue under the banner; "All politicians are bad - except my local one - and he/she is still getting my vote!" The reaction is similar to that of the 'global warming' faithful; facts and information to the contrary they are still faithful. At least it is possible to joke about it now without being labeled a heretic; "It's the Start of Spring, Otherwise Known to Al Gore as Proof of Global Warming"..." The source of the quote - President Bill Clinton. I guess the President isn't aware that the new PC term is 'Climate Change'; pretty much a 100% assured to be as accurate today as it was 1000, or a Million years ago before man existed, or a group of men realized there was huge potential profit to be gained by playing on peoples' fears, as well as establishing a new religion as the traditional ones go out of vogue.

The same fear, insecurity, and naiveté is used, and counted on by both political parties, as well as the special interest PACs that insure the only interest served is theirs.

Yeah - they should all be worried - but collectively we're too focused on 'my team' winning, or losing. Both the Democrats and Republican leadership count on it, and collectively we don't disappoint. The polarized fringe on both side served by 'worse case' propaganda; meanwhile the only people benefiting have 'special interests'. Corporate welfare is accepted as long as it generates an entitlement program enabling some poor person a minimalist existence. A personal entitlement in the form of a tax deduction is okay, but fight against any without any direct personal benefit.

You think that will change? Better yet - you think anyone currently with a national presence would risk exposing it all and running on a platform to tear it all up would last long in politics? I don't. Not when people elect candidates strictly on political party or what they expect to get 'free' from the resulting government. The consequences of that position only get exposed when the 'perfect storm' of one sided politics takes power as it did last January. Is anyone happy? Nor will they be when it turns 180 degrees come November when we once again will be given no choice of change but expect to get one by changing the table linen color.

You can already begin writing posts for the post 2012 election; "Well, Obama did the same thing when...."

Sad.




xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 10:27:30 AM)

I agree with your intent LaT.

And while I understand you are voting for any candidate that appeals too you, nevermind their affiliation. But look at Stupak, there were those that voted for their belief in him and in the end party pressure made him compromise something both he and his district must have held most important.

But the problem is an individual within the body of (a) Congress is not all that significant; and often enough ends up caucusing with the Dems or te Repubs anyway. So without a party or platform to be held accountable too or by, the Independent is only a lone wolf that seemingly has sufficient capital to campaign on his own, and never has to actually commit to anything that might be seen as controversial.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

I vote for individuals. Regardless of party affiliation.

I feel responsible to take the time to investigate each person's track record, what their important issues are, and make my decision that way. Independent thinking and all that rot.[:D]






brainiacsub -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 11:10:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

[sm=applause.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.


Vote Libertarian... (Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative)

Wrong...fiscal Conservatives and social Liberals are Independents. Libertarians stand for strict interpretations of the Constitution and limited government as their core platform. The deregulation of the banking and financial services sector over the last 10 yrs and the laisse-faire capitalism that nearly brought down the world economy was Libertarianism mascaurading as Conservatism. Libertarians, as a party, are ideologues every bit as much as Democrats and Republicans. They will tow their party line even when confronted with the flaws in their ideology. Independents - as moderates - can pick and choose the best ideas and solutions from all three ideologies and reject what doesn't work. The problem is, Independent candidates can never get selected in the primaries due to election laws, so by the time we reach the general elections, you only have ideologues representing the base of each of the parties. This is why there is so much partisan bickering among elected officials when 40+% of the population are moderate Independents.




Sanity -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 11:33:50 AM)


According to Alan Greenspan is wasn't "The deregulation of the banking and financial services sector over the last 10 yrs and the laisse-faire capitalism that nearly brought down the world economy" as you claim. It was

quote:

...the selling of the soaring number of subprime mortgages in securities to investors was the trigger for the financial crisis. He blamed affordable housing mandates set by federal officials (Barney Frank and Company) on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and their subsequent large-scale purchase of securities backed by subprime mortgages, for the run-up in the housing market and the subsequent bust.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/08/business/la-fi-greenspan8-2010apr08/2



And really, I would trust Alan Greenspoans word over yours any day.






LaTigresse -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 11:46:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

[sm=applause.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.


Vote Libertarian... (Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative)

Wrong...fiscal Conservatives and social Liberals are Independents. Libertarians stand for strict interpretations of the Constitution and limited government as their core platform. The deregulation of the banking and financial services sector over the last 10 yrs and the laisse-faire capitalism that nearly brought down the world economy was Libertarianism mascaurading as Conservatism. Libertarians, as a party, are ideologues every bit as much as Democrats and Republicans. They will tow their party line even when confronted with the flaws in their ideology. Independents - as moderates - can pick and choose the best ideas and solutions from all three ideologies and reject what doesn't work. The problem is, Independent candidates can never get selected in the primaries due to election laws, so by the time we reach the general elections, you only have ideologues representing the base of each of the parties. This is why there is so much partisan bickering among elected officials when 40+% of the population are moderate Independents.


And if this is indeed the case (because I know jackshit about the Libertarian party's ideology), I would never wish to identify with a Libertarian party either.




brainiacsub -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:09:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


According to Alan Greenspan is wasn't "The deregulation of the banking and financial services sector over the last 10 yrs and the laisse-faire capitalism that nearly brought down the world economy" as you claim. It was

quote:

...the selling of the soaring number of subprime mortgages in securities to investors was the trigger for the financial crisis. He blamed affordable housing mandates set by federal officials (Barney Frank and Company) on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and their subsequent large-scale purchase of securities backed by subprime mortgages, for the run-up in the housing market and the subsequent bust.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/08/business/la-fi-greenspan8-2010apr08/2



And really, I would trust Alan Greenspoans word over yours any day.


Thomas, Alan Greenspan was one of the architects of the financial sector collapse. You are cherry picking your information again. No one is denying that subprime mortgages were part of the problem, but they were not the cause of the financial meltdown. They were only the trigger. It was the unregulated trading of the derivatives market - derivatives based on subprime mortgages that caused the collapse. Alan Greenspan was warned of this back in the mid 90's by a lady named Brook Burn who wanted derivatives trading regulated. He testified in front of Congress that she was wrong and that free markets did not need to be regulated as greed could not exist in this model. When the markets collapsed, Greenspan testified in front of Congress again (Nov 08) and proclaimed that his worldview of free market economics was wrong and that in hindsight the derivatives market should have been regulated and in doing so would have prevented the collapse. You can find his testimony and a detailed discussion of the collapse here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/?utm_campaign=homepage&utm_medium=proglist&utm_source=proglist

I'm so glad you take his word over mine. I doubt you'll watch this program, but please have your facts straight before you try to engage me in this type of conversation.

edited to add this, a quote from your article:

"He said the selling of the soaring number of subprime mortgages in securities to investors was the trigger for the financial crisis."

This article, in it's entirety, supports my assertion, not yours. I can't believe we are reading the same article.




xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:16:52 PM)

I thought you were a brainiac?

It's always been my understanding that being an Independent means just that, not having some platform that was common to a group. It is where the independent thinkers reside. So I suspect there are a good number of Socially Conservative Independents that love spending their ass off.

Independent is little more than being independent of party affiliation, to imply otherwise suggests an agenda all to its own. Vote for the Nopartybaggers, aye?

Ideologues? You do realize that's the reason for parties and platforms, right? It affords voters with the information needed to make choices and thereby hold their officials accountable through stated positions.

Its been suggested that the independent candidate can easily alter his position, change his moral code and be held to only limited concepts of political accountability.

Without philosophical perspective man is little more than a chimp reacting impetuously time and again with no expectations of consistancy.



quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

[sm=applause.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Personally, I think both Democrats and Republicans should be worried. Neither seem too based in the reality of the people they are supposed to be representing.


Vote Libertarian... (Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative)

Wrong...fiscal Conservatives and social Liberals are Independents. Libertarians stand for strict interpretations of the Constitution and limited government as their core platform. The deregulation of the banking and financial services sector over the last 10 yrs and the laisse-faire capitalism that nearly brought down the world economy was Libertarianism mascaurading as Conservatism. Libertarians, as a party, are ideologues every bit as much as Democrats and Republicans. They will tow their party line even when confronted with the flaws in their ideology. Independents - as moderates - can pick and choose the best ideas and solutions from all three ideologies and reject what doesn't work. The problem is, Independent candidates can never get selected in the primaries due to election laws, so by the time we reach the general elections, you only have ideologues representing the base of each of the parties. This is why there is so much partisan bickering among elected officials when 40+% of the population are moderate Independents.





xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:22:18 PM)


I suggest doing indepedent research on the subject....Other than she's cute the sub isn't impressing me much here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

And if this is indeed the case (because I know jackshit about the Libertarian party's ideology), I would never wish to identify with a Libertarian party either.






brainiacsub -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:23:59 PM)

I don't know what you are trying to say. I only repsonded that your definition of Libertarian was wrong. Libertarian does not equal "social liberal, fiscal conservative."

Other than that, you just repeated what I said.




slvemike4u -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:26:53 PM)

Oh shit brainiac,there goes all of your luster....what a shame.
At least you're cute....that's something anyway [:D]




brainiacsub -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:30:07 PM)

Yet another reason I wish I were a fat chick ...(sigghhh)




slvemike4u -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:32:57 PM)

Now you're just lying thru your pretty little smile....[:D].




xBullx -> RE: Why is the Democratic Party worried? (4/9/2010 12:35:20 PM)


So answer this.... Do you believe the US Constitution is Socially Liberal or Conservative?




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875