It matters not who got our economy to this point

[bripat9643]

Compromise has become a word the right cannot even say unless deriding someone for compromising.

What has the left ever compromised on?

Stimulus, healthcare bill, DADT, Bush tax cuts

ROFL! In other words, nothing. Democrats voted against the Bush tax cuts almost to a man. The other bills were supported only by Democrats.

The left demands we move 90% of the way to complete socialism, and when the Republican party agrees to move only 80% of the way, the left calls that a "compromise." When does the left ever agree to move away from socialism? It doesn't. Once government programs are created, the are considered immutable by the left.

 

[bripat9643]

fiscal conservative (at least with my own finances)

In other words, you aren't a fiscal conservative. You're a liberal. You can't be both.

I pay my bills, I've never declared bankruptcy, I outright own my house and cars, I've worked very hard not to overextend myself and I waited until I was established for the big ticket items (wife, kids, house, etc.) Yet, I can see the need for a social contract/safety net because there are a whole lot of people who aren't in that situation.

All of which has nothing to do with your views on government spending. When a liberal says he's a "fiscal conservative," all it means is that he's eager to raise my taxes to pay for his social spending.

 

[rightwinger]

In other words, you aren't a fiscal conservative. You're a liberal. You can't be both.

I pay my bills, I've never declared bankruptcy, I outright own my house and cars, I've worked very hard not to overextend myself and I waited until I was established for the big ticket items (wife, kids, house, etc.) Yet, I can see the need for a social contract/safety net because there are a whole lot of people who aren't in that situation.

All of which has nothing to do with your views on government spending. When a liberal says he's a "fiscal conservative," all it means is that he's eager to raise my taxes to pay for his social spending.

Fiscal conservative means having enough revenue to cover your expenses. Enough money in to cover money out

Borrowing money to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy is not fiscal conservatism

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I know it's hard to believe that someone like me, a highly paid professional, would give you the time of day but that's just the way I am. I like to think that even the most blind can eventually be brought to the light. I've been wrong about that in the past yet I still remain hopefu.

You've been here for what? A few days? And you want to pretend you know me or anyone else on here for that matter? You've probably read maybe a dozen of my posts and you think you've got it all figured out?

Pompous is an understatement.

Admittedly, I have not much to go on about you. Neither, do you have much to go on about me yet you're the one who said I was a presumptuous prick.

Let's get to know each other, how 'bout that? I'm a design engineer in the electronics industry, two college degrees, 20+ years of professional experience, married, two kids, fiscal conservative (at least with my own finances), much more savings than debt. I've seen the world through a combination of work travel and frequent flyer miles. Had my own business for a while. Performed more shit jobs in my younger days than anyone has a right to.

Anything else you want to know? I'll answer if it doesn't blow my anonymity.

So what's your story gramps?

A much rougher one than yours. My story has been laid out for all to see early on in my stay here. I am not going to go through all of it again just for you but you can goto my posting history early on and find it for yourself. All I will say is I do own my own business and I started it from nothing. The rest you can dig up if you're that interested.

As far as my labeling you, that was based on the responses you gave. You presumed a lot of things you didnt know for sure and that made my label accurate.

 

[JoeNormal]

In other words, you aren't a fiscal conservative. You're a liberal. You can't be both.

I pay my bills, I've never declared bankruptcy, I outright own my house and cars, I've worked very hard not to overextend myself and I waited until I was established for the big ticket items (wife, kids, house, etc.) Yet, I can see the need for a social contract/safety net because there are a whole lot of people who aren't in that situation.

All of which has nothing to do with your views on government spending. When a liberal says he's a "fiscal conservative," all it means is that he's eager to raise my taxes to pay for his social spending.

This seems so non-sequitur that I hardly know how to respond.

It sounds like you can't even see the possibility that you might need assistance at some point.

 

[JoeNormal]

You've been here for what? A few days? And you want to pretend you know me or anyone else on here for that matter? You've probably read maybe a dozen of my posts and you think you've got it all figured out?

Pompous is an understatement.

Admittedly, I have not much to go on about you. Neither, do you have much to go on about me yet you're the one who said I was a presumptuous prick.

Let's get to know each other, how 'bout that? I'm a design engineer in the electronics industry, two college degrees, 20+ years of professional experience, married, two kids, fiscal conservative (at least with my own finances), much more savings than debt. I've seen the world through a combination of work travel and frequent flyer miles. Had my own business for a while. Performed more shit jobs in my younger days than anyone has a right to.

Anything else you want to know? I'll answer if it doesn't blow my anonymity.

So what's your story gramps?

A much rougher one than yours. My story has been laid out for all to see early on in my stay here. I am not going to go through all of it again just for you but you can goto my posting history early on and find it for yourself. All I will say is I do own my own business and I started it from nothing. The rest you can dig up if you're that interested.

As far as my labeling you, that was based on the responses you gave. You presumed a lot of things you didnt know for sure and that made my label accurate.

I probably do presume a lot. I've had quite a bit of experience with Tea Partiers and I suppose I've developed some pretty negative stereotypes. I will say that I've seen more evidence of intelligent life here than I was expecting (along with the usual crop of uneducated fools).

 

[bripat9643]

Fiscal conservative means having enough revenue to cover your expenses. Enough money in to cover money out

Borrowing money to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy is not fiscal conservatism

In other words, a so-called "fiscal conservative" wants to raise my taxes. No liberal who claimed to be a "fiscal conservative" ever talks about cutting government spending. So a liberal "fiscal conservative" is just another tax and spend liberal. How does that differ from any other kind of liberal?

 

[bripat9643]

I pay my bills, I've never declared bankruptcy, I outright own my house and cars, I've worked very hard not to overextend myself and I waited until I was established for the big ticket items (wife, kids, house, etc.) Yet, I can see the need for a social contract/safety net because there are a whole lot of people who aren't in that situation.

All of which has nothing to do with your views on government spending. When a liberal says he's a "fiscal conservative," all it means is that he's eager to raise my taxes to pay for his social spending.

This seems so non-sequitur that I hardly know how to respond.

It sounds like you can't even see the possibility that you might need assistance at some point.

Whether I may need assistance at some point isn't the issue. If I do, I don't necessarily have to get it from government. Before welfare existed, we had private charity in this country. Welfare is theft.

BTW, I doubt you understand the meaning of the term "non sequitur."

 

[JoeNormal]

All of which has nothing to do with your views on government spending. When a liberal says he's a "fiscal conservative," all it means is that he's eager to raise my taxes to pay for his social spending.

This seems so non-sequitur that I hardly know how to respond.

It sounds like you can't even see the possibility that you might need assistance at some point.

Whether I may need assistance at some point isn't the issue. If I do, I don't necessarily have to get it from government. Before welfare existed, we had private charity in this country. Welfare is theft.

BTW, I doubt you understand the meaning of the term "non sequitur."

I think I do but why don't you enlighten me?

I ask this of many people on this site and rarely get a response: What's your situation?

I think most conservatives see themselves as these independent, self sufficient entities that will somehow overcome whatever adversity comes their way. In my hometown, there are entire communities that were once filled with these types on conservatives that are now half foreclosed.

Our own Tea Party senator (Mike Lee) shorted his bank out of $400,000 because his paltry congressional salary of $174k (which he asked for) was supposedly insufficient to cover the mortgage. Is that the kind of fiscal conservative you'd prefer?

 

[rightwinger]

What has the left ever compromised on?

Stimulus, healthcare bill, DADT, Bush tax cuts

ROFL! In other words, nothing. Democrats voted against the Bush tax cuts almost to a man. The other bills were supported only by Democrats.

The left demands we move 90% of the way to complete socialism, and when the Republican party agrees to move only 80% of the way, the left calls that a "compromise." When does the left ever agree to move away from socialism? It doesn't. Once government programs are created, the are considered immutable by the left.

The Bush tax cuts were extended weren't they?

I didn't see universal healthcare or a Government option in the Healthcare Plan

The 2009 stimulus included 45% set aside for tax cuts

What have Republicans compromised on?

t t

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This seems so non-sequitur that I hardly know how to respond.

It sounds like you can't even see the possibility that you might need assistance at some point.

Whether I may need assistance at some point isn't the issue. If I do, I don't necessarily have to get it from government. Before welfare existed, we had private charity in this country. Welfare is theft.

BTW, I doubt you understand the meaning of the term "non sequitur."

I think I do but why don't you enlighten me?

I ask this of many people on this site and rarely get a response: What's your situation?

I think most conservatives see themselves as these independent, self sufficient entities that will somehow overcome whatever adversity comes their way. In my hometown, there are entire communities that were once filled with these types on conservatives that are now half foreclosed.

Our own Tea Party senator (Mike Lee) shorted his bank out of $400,000 because his paltry congressional salary of $174k (which he asked for) was supposedly insufficient to cover the mortgage. Is that the kind of fiscal conservative you'd prefer?

If true I would be voting him out not labeling an entire group because of HIS actions.

 

[Truthmatters]

I know more cons who lost their houses than I do liberals who lost their houses

 

[rightwinger]

Fiscal conservative means having enough revenue to cover your expenses. Enough money in to cover money out

Borrowing money to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy is not fiscal conservatism

In other words, a so-called "fiscal conservative" wants to raise my taxes. No liberal who claimed to be a "fiscal conservative" ever talks about cutting government spending. So a liberal "fiscal conservative" is just another tax and spend liberal. How does that differ from any other kind of liberal?

A true fiscal conservative understands that a balanced budget involves both revenue and expendetures.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I know more cons who lost their houses than I do liberals who lost their houses

God I wish you would find another hobby lol

 

[Truthmatters]

why so your lies would work better?

 

[JoeNormal]

Whether I may need assistance at some point isn't the issue. If I do, I don't necessarily have to get it from government. Before welfare existed, we had private charity in this country. Welfare is theft.

BTW, I doubt you understand the meaning of the term "non sequitur."

I think I do but why don't you enlighten me?

I ask this of many people on this site and rarely get a response: What's your situation?

I think most conservatives see themselves as these independent, self sufficient entities that will somehow overcome whatever adversity comes their way. In my hometown, there are entire communities that were once filled with these types on conservatives that are now half foreclosed.

Our own Tea Party senator (Mike Lee) shorted his bank out of $400,000 because his paltry congressional salary of $174k (which he asked for) was supposedly insufficient to cover the mortgage. Is that the kind of fiscal conservative you'd prefer?

If true I would be voting him out not labeling an entire group because of HIS actions.

I can only hope but he has 4 more years in office and even then, heaven forbit Utahans should vote for anyone but the fucking republican.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I think I do but why don't you enlighten me?

I ask this of many people on this site and rarely get a response: What's your situation?

I think most conservatives see themselves as these independent, self sufficient entities that will somehow overcome whatever adversity comes their way. In my hometown, there are entire communities that were once filled with these types on conservatives that are now half foreclosed.

Our own Tea Party senator (Mike Lee) shorted his bank out of $400,000 because his paltry congressional salary of $174k (which he asked for) was supposedly insufficient to cover the mortgage. Is that the kind of fiscal conservative you'd prefer?

If true I would be voting him out not labeling an entire group because of HIS actions.

I can only hope but he has 4 more years in office and even then, heaven forbit Utahans should vote for anyone but the fucking republican.

 

[Care4all]

Lots of polls and blame to go around. Enough to keep partisans on both sides pointing fingers for years.
What SHOULD matter at this point is why we are doing so poorly in our recovery. Blaming Bush is pointless to our recovery. The historians can decide who and what it will be viewed like later. In the meantime lets focus on the here and now and decide which path we need to take to expidite our recovery.

All the posts about BOOOOOOOOOSH are just pointless. For example I believe Frank, dems and many spinless pubs are to blame but starting such threads serves no purpose as its water under the bridge now and blame cant fix shit. Congress and Obama can however.

usually, unless you get to the ROOT of a problem, the problem will persist....

It is important to truly and honestly figure out what happened and once identified you can kill the root of the problem.....not repeat your mistakes.

soooo, until we are honest with ourselves on who caused what, and what followed, I'm afraid there will be no good solution.

 

[JoeNormal]

If true I would be voting him out not labeling an entire group because of HIS actions.

I can only hope but he has 4 more years in office and even then, heaven forbit Utahans should vote for anyone but the fucking republican.

There was a time I didn't feel that way. I voted for Reagan twice and papa Bush once (not sure I'm proud of that any longer). It wasn't until GWB that my opinion of Republicans started going downhill and the current cast - Boehner, McConnell, Cantor among others has disgusted me even more than BushCo.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Lots of polls and blame to go around. Enough to keep partisans on both sides pointing fingers for years.
What SHOULD matter at this point is why we are doing so poorly in our recovery. Blaming Bush is pointless to our recovery. The historians can decide who and what it will be viewed like later. In the meantime lets focus on the here and now and decide which path we need to take to expidite our recovery.

All the posts about BOOOOOOOOOSH are just pointless. For example I believe Frank, dems and many spinless pubs are to blame but starting such threads serves no purpose as its water under the bridge now and blame cant fix shit. Congress and Obama can however.

Hey this is the same tripe the right brought out whenever someone would mention how badly the war in Iraq turned out. The Repubs then loved to say "It doesnt matter how we got here, what do we do now." The past mistakes dont matter to the cons, but we are supposed to allow them to fix it