THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!

[Hawk]

Actually, Bill. You are the one who cuts and paste. You are the megaphone for Olbermann ...

As for a liberal? Come on - look in the mirror !

A liberal is anyone who feels that government should take care of the people, and supports:
big government, big spending
taxing everyone
forcing the top 5% of the population to pay for the bottom 95% of the population
thinks that cair is a wonderful origination
thinks that the ACLU is a great origination
thinks that ACORN was falsely accused
thinks that it is ok for people to sit on their ass, not work and sponge off the tax payers
likes to socialise everything
supports the growth of welfare
supports illegal immigration
supports gay marriage
supports abortion
supports cutting spending for defense but yet wants to increase spending for welfare
supports expansion of unions
says they are tolerate but yet sends out the seiu to beat up people who do not agree with them
thinks they are the smartest thing since Einstein but yet just parrots anything they hear on MSNBC
thinks that Jimmy Carter was a great President
thinks that FDR was the best President in history
thinks that Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton are wonderful people
wants to pay for everything with money we do not have (But hey they will just print more money! or borrow it from China)
feels that the life of a bird or tree is more important than a baby
feels that drilling for something that will keep from depending on foreign countries is a bad thing.
thinks that is wise to put a ceo of a bank that was bailed on the economic board of the federal government
thinks that having the terrorist trials in New York in a civilian court is a great thing
thinks that the mosque in Ground Zero is truly for tolerance
claims that they are for free speech but yet tries to block anyone who doesn't agree with them from speaking
thinks that passing a bill that 70% of the country didn't want without reading it, and bankrupted the country is a good thing

I can go on?

I'm against spending.
The government's job is to protect the people.
Taxing everyone ? Who do you think shouldn't be taxed ?
I never said anything about the top 5% paying for the rest. Only that if they own most of the wealth, they pay their fair share.
What is "cair" ?
The ACLU sucks.
Acorn was justly accused. But it accusations did not define all members of accorn.
Where in hell do you think anyone who is liberal supports lazy ass welfare frauds?
The military needs oversight in their spending. If you don't know about some of their waste, search.
The conservatives freak out anytime someone says their medicare will be cut. They must be liberals then. Medicare is welfare.
Obama has deported more illegals in two years than Bush did in Eight years. Obama must be the conservative and Bush the liberal ? It is the people who hire the illegals that keep them coming. Now tell me why the Republicans are against punishing the people who hire (support) the illegals. Why are the Republicans against the "cards" Obama proposed to prove who is legal so that ONLY the legal aliens get hired ?
Not all liberals support gay marriage.
Conservative want government OUT of our lives. Why should government legislate abortion ? Government forcing societal issues is wrong.
Why is it wrong for workers to band together ?
So you would like to see drilling wells on the Atlantic coast ?
Our government is based on the fact that everyone has a right to a trial. Are you against our constitution ?
The constitution says that the government cannot choose one religion over another. It also protects freedom of religion. According to the constitution we cannot stop them from having a building near ground zero. Are you against the constitution ?
I don't know of anyone who is against free speech. Equal access, good or bad ?
No one is for bankrupting the country Frank. Letting the tax cuts to the wealthy end will help cut the deficit. The only jobs they create are in other countries.

[Hawk]

Actually, Bill. You are the one who cuts and paste. You are the megaphone for Olbermann ...

Just curious why you continue to enjoy this lie so much. Is lying the typical methodology of conservatives ? That's a rhetorical question.

Now will you answer any questions or continue to avoid them because of your, well, lack of knowledge ?

My cut and paste was in reply to PSTL's links, which I read. It was the easiest way to respond with the facts written in a way that was concise.

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[Hawk]

amen frank! you know the score! yore ability to conceptalize things is amazing! when your going to college at a state payed school while talkin about how socalism sucks, r u a politics major? if not you should major in it. . your proffesors wood be most impressed & would probably ask u to publish reserch with them. then when your on Meet the Press i can say 'hey there's frank i knew him back when".

hawk..heads up..there is an edit button on this site. no need to reply 9 times in a row when nobody has replied to u.

and that's pretty funy captain g., i suck at tyyping so you called me out on it. .

One: You are an ass, and this joke is no longer funny ..
Two: I refuse to rebuttal with a fake member ...

I've yet to see you rebut with an actual member. Parrot yes, rebut, no...

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[songsmith]

Wow, I take a week off, and you all just run amok!

Hawk, you're knocking them out of the park, citing facts and staying calm as everyone bangs the talking-points drum. Rock on!

Frank, as usual, you just never seem to back anything up with any argument of substance, just cut-and-paste stuff from Rightie websites... and yeah, that's Fruity Newt's Rule Number Two, discrediting your sources. Know why liberals do that to you? Because the sources are heavily biased. If you don't believe what you see on HuffPo, why must I then believe what I see on Drudge?

Phil, simply predicting that someone will discredit your source does not then mean you are correct. It means you know your opponent will not allow your bias. If he does allow it, the entire argument is flawed, because it is based on bias and not fact. Newt can be discredited on nearly everything he's ever perpetrated... the Contract On America was a prime example of unbridled ambition and ego, self-righteous pre-Fox political theater, that accomplished... nothing. Oops, I did it again.

Tragic, it's obvious you're dumbing yourself down to eff with Frank, join in the conversation instead!
-------------------------------------->JMS

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[songsmith]

John, as long as some one doesn't agree with you and doesn't get their info from MSNBC, you will think they have no substance. If anything, it is the liberals who have no substance. Name something they did in the past four years that worked? Name something they can campaign on? Name something that they did in the past four years that they campaigned on during the mid terms?

Something they did that worked: The auto bailout. I opposed it, but the US auto industry is now thriving, thanks to the bailout and a shot in the arm from the temporary tax break.
Something they can campaign on: Despite red-hot opposition by a corporate-fed right-wing opposition, they passed a healthcare bill and held off a New Great Depression. The economy is recovering, albeit joblessly, and there's little anyone can do anymore to deny it.
Something they did in the past 4 years that they campaigned on: I'm not completely sure what you're asking, but I assume you're referring to Congress. Well, I have noticed nobody's bufu-ing the male pages anymore, there's always that.

Oh, and I don't watch MSNBC, or Fox News that isn't a soundbyte. I'm a daytime radio guy. But you knew that. Jay Rockefeller could get rid of both cable networks (he can't, and neither can the FCC, anyone trying to scare you with it is full of crap) and I would applaud. I support the Fairness Doctrine: if you get to spout your whacko bull, the other guy gets to say his whacko bull, too. How could that be a bad thing?--->JMS

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[songsmith]

It also wasn't a bunch of right wing idiots who were against it - over 70% of the country was against it; they consisted of people from all political parties.

Exactly. I don't feel like looking it up right now, but the last poll I saw said that 70% opposed it... 35% because it was too much, and 35% because it didn't do enough.
Healthcare costs are going to increase, they've gone up drastically long before Obama took office. Has there ever been a healthcare price DECREASE? Insurance companies are still VERY profitable... the head of United Healthcare is the highest paid executive in the US. Blaming Obama's plan is just a convenient scapegoat for them to squeeze us more.
I think that the current admin should simply publicly ask the GOP congress which parts they would take away; the pre-existing conditions clause, the price breaks for seniors in the donut hole, or maybe they could reinstate the spending ceiling where they drop you if you cost too much?
Another question... if the Affordable Healthcare bill is socialism, why are the insurance companies still profitable, why do they even still exist? --->JMS

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[songsmith]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... h-care.php

Don't usually visit Talking Points Memo, I got there through Google while looking for the story of a Tea Party-favored candidate who threw a fit when he found out he didn't have "socialist" healthcare yet. Heard about it on Thom Hartmann's show.--->JMS

[lonewolf]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... h-care.php

Don't usually visit Talking Points Memo, I got there through Google while looking for the story of a Tea Party-favored candidate who threw a fit when he found out he didn't have "socialist" healthcare yet. Heard about it on Thom Hartmann's show.--->JMS

That was all very nicely framed, but in reality, there was no "fit" and he wanted to pay for it out of his own pocket. He wasn't looking for any handouts...he just wanted to do the responsible thing and make sure he was covered during the transition. His only fault in this matter is that he didn't realize that the solution was to pay for an extra month of his prior insurance.

Anybody with a 3 digit IQ can see thru this pitiful attempt to take him out of context. This is just another illustration of just how far the far left have fallen after they were exposed. Thankfully, the extreme socialist progressives only manage to attain power every 70-80 years or about once in a lifetime. Its kinda like a childhood disease. Glad we're getting over it.

Now...if the other side would get past that lip service...

[Banned]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/critics-s ... d=12192558

While congress was in recess for the elections, Obama secretly completed huge arms deal with Saudi Arabia. I thought it was only Bush who has such strong ties with the Saudis? How is that changy thing going?

[songsmith]

We HAVE to kiss Saudi ass, Joe, because certain people would rather be enslaved to them and Big Oil, than develope alternative fuels and energy. You know, we COULD buy more petro from Venezuela... oops, they're SOCIALIST.

BTW, time's ticking... the country will be completely recovered by April 15, 2011, or the so-called patriots will rise up in revolution! That's how much time they gave Big Bad O, so obviously they can't give their own goobers anymore time than that, right? Tick-tick-tick! America's watching.--->JMS

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[TragicMind]

frank ur a golden god, always elevatting the discussion without stereotypin anyone and never contradicting urself like talking about how librils discredit a source after sayin u wont give credit to a site like the hufington post cuz its libril. u rock cuz u wuld never do that!

[Banned]

We HAVE to kiss Saudi ass, Joe, because certain people would rather be enslaved to them and Big Oil, than develope alternative fuels and energy. You know, we COULD buy more petro from Venezuela... oops, they're SOCIALIST.

BTW, time's ticking... the country will be completely recovered by April 15, 2011, or the so-called patriots will rise up in revolution! That's how much time they gave Big Bad O, so obviously they can't give their own goobers anymore time than that, right? Tick-tick-tick! America's watching.--->JMS

I thought Obama was going to be SOOOOO different from Bush? Seems like nothing has changed in the foreign policy. Did you buy the changy thing, or did you know it was all BS?

[f.sciarrillo]

[edit]

[PStl]

Phil, simply predicting that someone will discredit your source does not then mean you are correct. -------------------------------------->JMS

I just thought it was ironic, after f posted Newts Laws, that in a matter of minutes 2 of them were used against me!
Of course you should always question any of the numbers either side comes up with, and they'll surely be spun in whatever direction the source deems necessary. That being said, I'd have more respect for the debator who attacks the numbers. If they're proved false, then that source will be discredited. Of course, if it's the CBO, then it's just called an adjustment.
I've read on hear countless times how there isn't any conservative "plans" ever offered, but I've posted some that I personally think are prudent, but we'll see next year.
If rising costs, certain inflation, and 9.6% unemployment is a recovery, I'll still remain pessimistic.
Excuse me, I have to get back to filling the basement cupboards with food!
Good Day!

[hicksjd9]

We go back and forth on all this stuff, but I don't think any of what I've heard addresses what I believe is the true cause of our issues.

Want to fix most of our country's problems?

Fix our country's parents. Have them teach the importance of hard work, education, and honesty--especially in the times that it's not easy. Have parents (today's leaders) lead by action and example and not just empty words!

You will solve welfare, education, and the financial crisis in one generation.

It's called character and it's something that our country is sorely lacking. We are really in a moral crisis. The financial crisis is simply a symptom of the disease.[/i]

[bassist_25]

We go back and forth on all this stuff, but I don't think any of what I've heard addresses what I believe is the true cause of our issues.

Want to fix most of our country's problems?

Fix our country's parents. Have them teach the importance of hard work, education, and honesty--especially in the times that it's not easy. Have parents (today's leaders) lead by action and example and not just empty words!


You will solve welfare, education, and the financial crisis in one generation.

If only the world operated on such reductionist principles. Even Weber, who posited that social bonds created through institutions and shared identity help sustain social equalibrium, recognized the importance of other factors in shaping society.

Welfare, educational, and economic issues have structural etiologies as well as socialization etiologies. There will always be structural and cyclical unemployment, necessitating unemployment insurance. Likewise, society needs a labor force of low-wage workers to serve food, pump gas, and deliver newspapers. The latent dysfuction of that is their wages may not provide a sustainable standard of living, thus leading to them drawing food stamps or asking for energy caps. The argument can be posited that they should strive for upward mobility - and I agree - however, if everyone became upwardly mobile, then who would serve our coffee or answer our service calls when Vista crashes for the 10,983th time?

I don't purport to be an expert on education; however, I do know that before we have any discussion about our educational success, we need to have a serious discussion about the criterion validity of our assessment systems. That is, we need to determine whether standardized testing, No Child Left Behind, etc. is actually preparing students to succeed in the real world. It's a knowledge economy out there nowadays, and are our educational systems teaching students to throw back information by rote memory or are they teaching students to think critically and actually create knowledge? It would be great if parents could get children to internalize these things, but that means creating a nation of autodidacts. Again, that's too reductionist and would be impossible short of creating a perfectly engineered society.

It's called character and it's something that our country is sorely lacking.

We are really in a moral crisis.

Morals are social constructs, and whether we are or are not in a moral crisis is contingent upon the narrative we have built and agreed upon. Then, our perception of having a moral crisis and whether or not that crisis has a direct and tangible impact on how our economic, educational, and social institutions work is a different matter.

The financial crisis is simply a symptom of the disease.

Agreed. But don't forget that at the micro-level, people may act congruently with internalized values and morals and the rationality axiom may not be relevant; however, at the macro-level, people generally act rationally - that means they may do what benefits them the most insofar as social structures allow them.

Fuck, I'm sounding more like a post-modernist every day. Double-fuck, I posted in a political thread.