RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (Full Version)

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



Message


willbeurdaddy -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 8:52:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

The last part should be,

I'm not interested in The Heretic’s idea of working with the other side as cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are unacceptable. The more intelligent Democrats are the progressive liberals.


I assume you said the same thing when Obama cut $500 Billion from Medicare.




slvemike4u -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 8:55:53 AM)

Care to share with the class as to how he cut that......was it by lopping folks off the rolls,raising the age...or substituting vouchers for coverage ?
I will await your answer with baited breath.




Moonhead -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 9:01:52 AM)

I wouldn't abate your breathing waiting for Wilbur to substantiate something he said: you'll suffocate...




BamaD -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 9:02:13 AM)

Part of Obamacare was cutting money from Medicare to provide Obamacare funding.




Lucylastic -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 9:04:53 AM)

When people come to a debate without knowing facts and truths from spin and outright lies, you dont stand a chance of intelligent debate.
Plus Ive thought intelligent politics has always been an oxymoron.
And Im looking at three countries to come to that conclusion




mnottertail -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 9:10:30 AM)

Even here in the midwest where we have people suffocating under 4 million bushels of corn we know he didn't cut 500 billion in medicare/medicaid funding, he is going to save it.

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_8307e73a-de48-11df-80ad-001cc4c002e0.html




slvemike4u -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 9:48:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Part of Obamacare was cutting money from Medicare to provide Obamacare funding.
So here is another poster who is wanting on the clueless list....we aim to please...you have been duly added.




SilverMark -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 10:03:17 AM)

The largest problem with "intelligent political debate" is the continual re-railing of the topics.

Part of the reason I left for such a long time, you cannot have an analyticl discussion, when one
takes pot shots with inflammatroy remarks at another.

Disagreeing is fine but, I have had posters insult everything from one's sexual proclivities to
bringing another's children into the insults.

Some days it is just best to find another way to enjoy the day[8D].. and those I can find without
any personal deroggatory remarks....




willbeurdaddy -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 10:25:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

When people come to a debate without knowing facts and truths from spin and outright lies, you dont stand a chance of intelligent debate.


Oh? What is a spin or lie. You do know that Obama claimed $500 billion in Medicare cuts? Morever, you do know that the CBO included a rare note to their scoring of Obamacare that criticized the administration for attempting to double count the $500 billion, right? Is the "non-partisan" CBO spinning or lying?

"The key point is that the savings to the HI trust fund under the PPACA would be received by the
government only once, so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at
the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs.
Trust fund accounting shows the magnitude of the savings within the trust fund, and those
savings indeed improve the solvency of that fund; however, that accounting ignores the burden
that would be faced by the rest of the government later in redeeming the bonds held by the trust
fund. Unified budget accounting shows that the majority of the HI trust fund savings would be
used to pay for other spending under the PPACA and would not enhance the ability of the
government to redeem the bonds credited to the trust fund to pay for future Medicare benefits.
To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability
to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would
essentially double-count a large share of those savings and thus overstate the improvement in the
government’s fiscal position."





Lucylastic -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 10:31:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

When people come to a debate without knowing facts and truths from spin and outright lies, you dont stand a chance of intelligent debate.


Oh? What is a spin or lie. You do know that Obama claimed $500 billion in Medicare cuts? Morever, you do know that the CBO included a rare note to their scoring of Obamacare that criticized the administration for attempting to double count the $500 billion, right? Is the "non-partisan" CBO spinning or lying?

"The key point is that the savings to the HI trust fund under the PPACA would be received by the
government only once, so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at
the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs.
Trust fund accounting shows the magnitude of the savings within the trust fund, and those
savings indeed improve the solvency of that fund; however, that accounting ignores the burden
that would be faced by the rest of the government later in redeeming the bonds held by the trust
fund. Unified budget accounting shows that the majority of the HI trust fund savings would be
used to pay for other spending under the PPACA and would not enhance the ability of the
government to redeem the bonds credited to the trust fund to pay for future Medicare benefits.
To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability
to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would
essentially double-count a large share of those savings and thus overstate the improvement in the
government’s fiscal position."



Stop with the victim mentality, I wasnt talking about your comments , sheesh calm down dearie.
Look at who I responded to.
NOT YOU
I dont expect you to give sources.




Kirata -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 12:51:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

Part of the reason I left for such a long time, you cannot have an analyticl discussion, when one takes pot shots with inflammatroy remarks at another... Some days it is just best to find another way to enjoy the day

Coming into Politics and Religion to enjoy yourself was probably a mistake. [:D]

But, of course, the forum wasn't set up for your personal enjoyment. And leaving instead of becoming part of the solution is a lousy set of qualifications for bitching about it.

Welcome back.

K.






willbeurdaddy -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 12:54:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

When people come to a debate without knowing facts and truths from spin and outright lies, you dont stand a chance of intelligent debate.


Oh? What is a spin or lie. You do know that Obama claimed $500 billion in Medicare cuts? Morever, you do know that the CBO included a rare note to their scoring of Obamacare that criticized the administration for attempting to double count the $500 billion, right? Is the "non-partisan" CBO spinning or lying?

"The key point is that the savings to the HI trust fund under the PPACA would be received by the
government only once, so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at
the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs.
Trust fund accounting shows the magnitude of the savings within the trust fund, and those
savings indeed improve the solvency of that fund; however, that accounting ignores the burden
that would be faced by the rest of the government later in redeeming the bonds held by the trust
fund. Unified budget accounting shows that the majority of the HI trust fund savings would be
used to pay for other spending under the PPACA and would not enhance the ability of the
government to redeem the bonds credited to the trust fund to pay for future Medicare benefits.
To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability
to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would
essentially double-count a large share of those savings and thus overstate the improvement in the
government’s fiscal position."



Stop with the victim mentality, I wasnt talking about your comments , sheesh calm down dearie.
Look at who I responded to.
NOT YOU
I dont expect you to give sources.


I saw who you responded to. Since we both made the same point it didnt matter who you falsely accused of lying.




SternSkipper -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:08:43 PM)

quote:

It is nothing new...discourse is the norm not the exception...it has worked pretty good this way for a long time but it would be nice every now and then to work together.


I hope you mean sober discourse... which is not really what's going on. I think the OP's  analysis is fairly valid ... I think that he perhaps could point out more strongly as to how democrats have allowed themselves to be dragged further down the rathole than their constituents are in any way inclined to venture. And sadly, those with an actual liberal belief system are getting fed up with both sides of the aisle.
I find myself hoping a CREDIBLE third party will emerge and throw both off balance. If elections were no longer winnable on the basis of innuendo, they might actually have to come up with sound positions.





SternSkipper -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:13:00 PM)

quote:

I saw who you responded to. Since we both made the same point it didnt matter who you falsely accused of lying.


Here ... Sokolove will probably branch into personal injury for republicans based on their rantings... He's recovered billions for slip and fall artists over the past three decades... give him a call...

http://web.sokolovelaw.com/Brand-National.html?gclid=CKHV8ofYs6kCFQzNKgodoSxkLg




willbeurdaddy -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:16:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

It is nothing new...discourse is the norm not the exception...it has worked pretty good this way for a long time but it would be nice every now and then to work together.


I hope you mean sober discourse... which is not really what's going on. I think the OP's  analysis is fairly valid ... I think that he perhaps could point out more strongly as to how democrats have allowed themselves to be dragged further down the rathole than their constituents are in any way inclined to venture. And sadly, those with an actual liberal belief system are getting fed up with both sides of the aisle.
I find myself hoping a CREDIBLE third party will emerge and throw both off balance. If elections were no longer winnable on the basis of innuendo, they might actually have to come up with sound positions.





What do you mean by "off balance". And on the lib side there are so many factions it would be nearly impossible to coalesce into a third party...unlike the very CREDIBLE tea party movement, which in fact bridges the two major factions in the GOP.




SternSkipper -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:19:04 PM)

quote:

Stop with the victim mentality, I wasnt talking about your comments , sheesh calm down dearie.
Look at who I responded to.
NOT YOU
I dont expect you to give sources.


Lucy... I've figured it out... they are slowly but consistently building the largest personal injury case in world history.
Have you had a look at WillB's wrists lately?



[image]local://upfiles/18637/6ACECEFBD18F49E39D3801A28D5C7B53.jpg[/image]




SternSkipper -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:25:08 PM)

As the beatles said Yeah Yeah Yeah....

quote:


What do you mean by "off balance". And on the lib side there are so many factions it would be nearly impossible to coalesce into a third party...unlike the very CREDIBLE tea party movement, which in fact bridges the two major factions in the GOP.


Listen, if you kooks or the fringe kooks can come up with Ross Perot, and then later a movement that at first makes itself out to be a party, gets a few stiffs elected portraying to their marks that they would be movers and shakers only to turn out to be fall guys and secondary voices to the established machine... there's always hope.
Take my advice on that other thing, you just might have a case.





SternSkipper -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:27:23 PM)

quote:

What do you mean by "off balance". And on the lib side there are so many factions it would be nearly impossible to coalesce into a third party...unlike the very CREDIBLE tea party movement, which in fact bridges the two major factions in the GOP.


TeaParty - Hey I got elected and I am thrilled to be on the big red bus. Where should I sit.

GOP - Get in the back and shut the fuck up.





Musicmystery -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 1:28:54 PM)

quote:

unlike the very CREDIBLE tea party movement, which in fact bridges the two major factions in the GOP.


But alas, does so out of complete naivety.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: What ever happened to REAL INTELLIGENT Political debate? (6/13/2011 3:31:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

unlike the very CREDIBLE tea party movement, which in fact bridges the two major factions in the GOP.


But alas, does so out of complete naivety.


In the sense of the details, yes. In the sense of the big picture, not at all. But thats what a representative republic is all about.




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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.347656E-02