I lost interest once the league expanded to too many teams, then the trades begin. I'd rather play which I still do, got a game tonight!
|
I lost interest once the league expanded to too many teams, then the trades begin. I'd rather play which I still do, got a game tonight!
That made me laugh out loud.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Personally, I hope that some Republicans also get the boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Times are a changin'.
There are some good Constitution, Libertarian and Independent candidates out there.
Years ago we were rightly afraid of voting for someone other than Democrat or Republican fearing that we'd be taking votes from the "2nd best"... but I see us getting closer and closer to people being fed up with the BS from many of the mainstream Republicans and Democrats.
Some of the Republicans have been 'primaried " already. Some will be vulnerable in the next cycle.
Here is something to ponder. The Republican party was born roughly around 1854 after the Kansas-Nebraska act was passed.In the 1854 congressional elections 44 Republicans were elected to the House and several were elected to the Senate . By 1858 the Republicans won control of the House of Representatives .
Within 6 years they elected their first President(2nd candidate for POTUS) ,and the existing Whig party was rendered irrelevant and defunct.
That is how fast a party can rise and fall. The Republicans have a choice to make. They can become the Party that the Tea Party wants them to be ;or risk ceasing to exist.
Hello again, tom:
These are interesting times...
I've heard it said, because I said it myself, that Obama isn't unpopular, as the right asserts, because he moved left. He's unpopular because he didn't move FAR enough left.
This election will also rid the Democrats of their middle too. Maybe it IS good to have to TWO ideologically pure parties...
excon
I think so . It is the job of the parties to persuade the middle they are the better option... not to swing with the political winds.
I don't see this happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Both parties are trying hard to do so already - and it is not working.
Correct. As an outside observer I can't believe the divisiveness and animosity that exists in your politics - it can only harm your country, not help it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
Amen, Brother.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello NK:Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I don't know. Yeah, it's ugly, but as I'm sure tom will remind us, it's been UGLIER. We survived. I hope he's right.
excon
Again I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
We in the US can only hope that voters stop voting by party alone: that they become more active - and do more research - before they hit the button or lever on the voting machine.
To be fair the people that post anonymously on the internet are some of the worst offenders. I have family in the states and they really don't care to discuss politics or won't look down on people who support the other party (like I see here all the time).
I can assure you these are not the worse times . The founders themselves were more viral. Half of them were proponents of the French Revolution's remedies for political dissent. The battles inside Washington's cabinet between the competing visions by Jefferson and Hamilton almost destroyed the nation at it's infancy.
In many ways ,the ideological divide mirrors their competing views ,although believe it or not... the differences today are not as clear cut as they were then. The divisions have actually blurred.
Americans are emotional, expressive people for the most part, and we have had a lot of that the last few political cycle and that's what we do. You have to overlook the spin and step back from the rhetoric and just go through the process.
Sometimes in our enthusiasm to make a point we overlook the facts, and just go with feelings and don't care about the facts. After all ask any American anything and we always have feelings, and opinions and just don't care about the facts.
http://democrats.senate.gov/journal/...cfm?id=277621&,
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/83057-290-bills
Of course, that's only the ones that the repubs didn't obstuct.
Obama’s tax cuts deserve attention - KansasCity.com
Ever notice the louder they holler, the less they really know?? Only in America.
I was raised to keep politics and religion a private issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Same here. But the anonymous nature of these forums brings out something different in some people.Quote:
Originally Posted by J_9
What NK doesn't see is the picnics with neighbors that have diametrically opposite opinions. This forum is a suitable venue for airing out the differences.
And there is nothing wrong with anonymity . When the founders published editorials ripping their political opponents they frequently used pseudonyms . I suspect that was done so they could avoid dueling.
But I love going back and forth with the fellas!! Wish we had web cams so we could make faces with each other, now that would be fun!!
My husband would SO get into that!Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Love it . The Dems in the House think they did a good job because they passed legislation that the Senate has not passed. Thankfully there was barely enough opposition in the Senate to block them .They damaged the nation enough with their budget busting spending .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
If the Dems claim their "generosity "in letting some workers temporarily keep some of their money is a tax cut then they are more delusional than I thought. Wait until these workers have to file next year... they will find out what kind of tax cut it actually was.
Be happy Tom, it could have been a lot worse with McCain/Palin at the helm. Imagine that disaster hitting us, and where we would be now.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Out of one side of your mouth, you complain about budget busting deficit spending... Then, without missing a beat, you call for tax cut for the rich that would add $700 BILLION to the deficit.
You say they need this money to create jobs... That's laughable on its face. They already HAVE 89% of ALL the money. If THAT doesn't help 'em create jobs, NOTHING will. In fact, I agree with David Stockman, Ronald Reagans Budget Director, the tax cuts for the rich should EXPIRE..
excon
Here's what I think. McCain would've done more modest stimulus and supply side solutions. There probably would've been some sort of health care reform proposed that would've been bi-partisan because McCain knows with a Dem majority he could not have gone too far in his proposal .
In foreign affairs the policy would've remained the same... even Obama realized that American foreign policy doesn't stray all that much with the change of adminstrations .
So what does that mean ? Economically we would be somewhere close to the same pace in the recovery as we are now ;but our long term obligations would be in much better shape.
And the Democrats would NOT be looking at a tsunami today.
Perhaps Obama is the best thing that could happen to the country regarding clarity. Not since the 1930s have the Fabians had a chance to accelerate their utopian folly as theyhave in the last 2 years. The backlash coming was predicatable and is necessary.
Ex there is 2 ways to balance an imbalanced budget. The Dems are hard wired to tax and spend . They implode at the thought of cuts in spending .
Tax cuts work and you know it . Even your hero JFK recognized that and implemented it.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The Republicans, on the other hand, IMPLODE when asked specifically WHAT cuts they'll make. They don't HAVE an answer. They'd rather smear the Dems with the "S" word.
Tax cuts, in and of themselves, DON'T work. If a nation is OVERTAXED, they would. But, our rich aren't overtaxed. NOBODY, says these tax cuts for the rich will pay for themselves... That means your children and your grandchildren will pay for them. Now, if you proposed $700 BILLION in spending cuts that PAY for the tax cut, I'll listen...
Remember when we talked about you guys voting against your own interests?? THIS is one of those times... You AREN'T the super rich. I don't know WHY you want to burden yours, and MY children for them. I have NO idea... Nope... I AIN'T buying the job creation BS. David Stockman doesn't either. It's a GIFT, pure and simple - a gift to those who need it LEAST! George Bush knew it was a gift.
excon
PS> Oh, good luck with privatizing SS or cutting Medicare. Good luck too, with repealing Obamacare... Ain't happening...
There was record revenues into the Federal coffers with the current tax cuts. The problem is that spending was never reigned in .
Here is the facts according to the CBO :
Extending the tax cuts would make revenues at 18.2% of the GDP (above the 50 year average) . Spending on the otherhand is 26.5% of GDP (exploding above the 20.3%50 year average ).The growth end of this is in the spending . The budget deficit, historically 2.3% of GDP, is projected to leap to 8.3% of GDP by 2020 under current policies. By the end of this year , the federal government will take in about $2.1 trillion in revenue while spending $3.6 trillion.
No my friend... spending is the problem. I would reform the tax structure and simplfly it and cut number one would be to make many of the accountants in the IRS jobless.
I don't know about Republicans... but I have plenty of ideas on how the budget could be trimmed. Let's start with the Federal transfer of funds to the States . That one should be a no brainer for the libs because the states with the high urban populations suffer the most from this wealth transfer .
How about eliminating completely the Dept of Education and that 'do nothing' bloated bureaucracy .Let the States use the savings to properly fund their school districts. How about this ? Bring Federal salaries and benefits DOWN to the level of the private sector.
There are many more including ending earmarks ,agricultural subsidies ,and other corporate welfare... and yes ,moving some of the entitlement structure into the private sector.
Each of these are worthy of their own op so I'll stop here. Suffice it to say that the next congressional session will have more members that think like me than there are today.
It's 'Time' to gloat. As Mark Twain famously said, the reports of his death were greatly exaggerated, so were the reports of the death of conservatism and the Republican party.
Time trumpeted the death of the Republican party in 2006. As Elliot noted a while back, "Sam Tanenhaus, an liberal historian, recently wrote a book called "The Death of Conservastism." The totals for this election?
Republicans gained over 650 seats in state legislatures, gaining 18 chambers - the most since 1928. Can you say redistricting? Landslide in the House, pickups in the Senate and what is it, 7 or 8 governorships including a female Republican in New Mexico.
It must feel like Armageddon to the left.
Don't get too happy my friend, you still have to prove your vocabulary goes belong ONE word.
Most of you know that I am a "conservative"... and/but...
I am somewhat happy with the election results, but I am with some many others who say "This is your chance, do it well or we will kick your butt out next time around".
Rick . What exactly do you think can be accomplished with a Dem President and Senate ?
At best this election puts them in a better position to block the President's agenda and perhaps set one of their own that the Dems will block. The proof in the pudding can only be the legislation they propose and pass in the House . It is doubtful the bills will move much further than that.
This is what I will be looking for... I don't want to see the corruption that plagued the GOP when they were previously the majority. I also want them to assert their oversight role .
Don't worry, it was just a minor gloat. But speaking of vocabulary, if I hear the word "bagger" one more time...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
Hello Fellas:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Here's how I see it shaping up. When Obama won, we gloated. What we DIDN'T realize, was the vote wasn't a vote FOR Democrats... It was a vote AGAINST George W. Bush. But, the Dems acted as though they were loved... They weren't.
The electorate is saying the same thing this time. This was NOT a vote in favor of right wing ideas, as much as it was a repudiation of Obama. By virtue of there NOT being a viable third party, the onus fell to the Republicans... But, don't make the mistake of thinking this happened because they LOVE you. They don't. But, they HAVE given you a chance... Don't blow it.
It looks, however, like Mitch McConnell is conducting business as usual... That ain't going to work. In short order, I think there will Be a viable third party, or even TWO - one run by Russ Feingold, and the other run by Sarah Palin.
excon
Something you might agree with, it could depend on who controls the conversation.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The left's message isn't going to change, Obama should have been more liberal and the right is nothing but racist 'baggers' mindlessly controlled by evil corporations, duped by Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. It worked well for them this time around...
Cool!! Rush Feingold , Howard the scream and possibly Evita running primary challenges against the President!! For not being liberal enough?? Bwaaa Haa Haaa!!
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Like yours changed when you got tromped?? In fact, you doubled down. It worked. Why shouldn't the lefty's try the same thing? Dude!
The arrogance here, is that you righty's actually EXPECT the message to change. It's OK, though. I'm guilty of it too. For over 10 years, I've expected YOU to change when you heard the logic and reason of my positions... Didn't happen.
excon
Actually I congratulated him, said it was historic and defended him repeatedly against the birther nonsense. And yes, I doubled down against his agenda... but I never talked like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:39 AM. |