The Lessons of History

[Oldstyle]

Wry speaks in the third person because Wry is strange...just saying...

So "no" far left people post on this board regularly? Just you "moderate" liberals? You get more amusing by the day, little buddy.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wry speaks in the third person because Wry is strange...just saying...

So "no" far left people post on this board regularly? Just you "moderate" liberals? You get more amusing by the day, little buddy.

I'm not your buddy, and little is not something I've ever been called.

Far leftist advocate revolutionary change, I don't believe supporting gay and lesbian couples the right to marry is revolutionary, or supporting single payer health care, or continuing the social security system, or maintaining the progressive incme tax, or by raising revenue to pay for a war or police action or whatever we choose to call our involvement in the ME.

I don't consider holding banks and insurance companies accountable a far left tactic.

To deny people a basic right is radical, at least in the poli sci lexicon of which I'm familiar. The conservative right, those the far right today call RINO's, even objected to and lobbyed against the Equal Rights Amendment. That is to me radical - how do you describe such political activities?

P.S. Why not look up first person POV, second person POV and third person POV just for ducks. It appears you're a bit confused.

 

[Oldstyle]

Wry speaks in the third person because Wry is strange...just saying...

So "no" far left people post on this board regularly? Just you "moderate" liberals? You get more amusing by the day, little buddy.

I'm not your buddy, and little is not something I've ever been called.

Far leftist advocate revolutionary change, I don't believe supporting gay and lesbian couples the right to marry is revolutionary, or supporting single payer health care, or continuing the social security system, or maintaining the progressive incme tax, or by raising revenue to pay for a war or police action or whatever we choose to call our involvement in the ME.

I don't consider holding banks and insurance companies accountable a far left tactic.

To deny people a basic right is radical, at least in the poli sci lexicon of which I'm familiar. The conservative right, those the far right today call RINO's, even objected to and lobbyed against the Equal Rights Amendment. That is to me radical - how do you describe such political activities?

But you think that asking for fiscal sanity IS radical? That's the main difference between the two parties right now, Wry. One side feels like we can keep on spending money we don't have on an ever growing list of entitlement programs and the other side recognizes that we're reaching a tipping point and need to reduce that debt.

 

[peach174]

The Mayor of San Francisco did the same thing as Gov. Walker did.
It's too bad the the Gov. of Calif. hasn't done the same for his state. The cities are having to do it.
Fixing unfunded pensions so that they have pensions in the future is not radical.

 

[HUGGY]

The Lessons of History


It is impossible to "learn" from history if we do not hold those responsible for the gaming and abuse of the system accountable.

California was crushed by Enron and Kenny Lay's minions. Not by poor planning by Californians. The housing bubble was encouraged by both GOP and DNC and allowed to run wild until the enevitable "hide the sausage"/ derivitave scandal blew up that fantasy.

Could these disasters have been avoided? Sure. Can they be avoided in the future? Sure. If congress passed a law that looked at DAMAGE TO THE COUNTRY as a crime and not just incidental to the proccess we could "learn" not to game the system.

I like te Chinese method of "learning". When the powdered milk and baby formula started turning up poisoned by unscrupulous business entities in China because babies were getting sick and dying in the U S, China accused, prosecuted and executed some of the players in thier own country for DAMAGE TO THIER COUNTRY.

We should at least prosecute the main players in the derivative scam under the RICCO statutes and put some of them in prison for DAMAGE TO THE COUNTRY.

Just sayin...

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wry speaks in the third person because Wry is strange...just saying...

So "no" far left people post on this board regularly? Just you "moderate" liberals? You get more amusing by the day, little buddy.

I'm not your buddy, and little is not something I've ever been called.

Far leftist advocate revolutionary change, I don't believe supporting gay and lesbian couples the right to marry is revolutionary, or supporting single payer health care, or continuing the social security system, or maintaining the progressive incme tax, or by raising revenue to pay for a war or police action or whatever we choose to call our involvement in the ME.

I don't consider holding banks and insurance companies accountable a far left tactic.

To deny people a basic right is radical, at least in the poli sci lexicon of which I'm familiar. The conservative right, those the far right today call RINO's, even objected to and lobbyed against the Equal Rights Amendment. That is to me radical - how do you describe such political activities?

But you think that asking for fiscal sanity IS radical? That's the main difference between the two parties right now, Wry. One side feels like we can keep on spending money we don't have on an ever growing list of entitlement programs and the other side recognizes that we're reaching a tipping point and need to reduce that debt.

I don't agree with your premise on the main difference between the parties.

Don't put words in my mouth I didn't utter. I do believe in fiscal responsibility, my belief is rational not emotional, however I don't parrot the propaganda of the right. That does not make me a revolutionary or radical or even a liberal (in the pejorative sense of the word used by the right).

I don't disagree that spending needs to be controlled. I believe our priorities are screwed up and to achieve fiscal sanity we need to have a plan. The Romney plan is to cut taxes, cut regulations and cut government.

I find that to be myopic at best.

Cutting taxes when we are in debt is tantamount to cutting your works hours when bills are due.

A balanced budget amendment is stupid. Ask Alexander Hamilton why.

Not spending on our infrastructure is foolish, the GOP's opposition to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is foolish, myopic and politically motivated. Country First is nothing but a slogan (which I might add the GOP no longer asserts).

Cutting regulations depends on which regulations are to be cut. Allowing our water, air and soil to be polluted is foolish, myopic and is not cost effective.

Cutting government means cutting jobs, we already have a job crisis, why make it worse? If we are to make government smaller, we need to do so by attrition after setting priorities.

 

[Foxfyre]

Does anybody honestly think that Romney and his campaign people are going to be any more dishonest, vile, and manipulative than Obama, his campaign people, and his surrogate media have already been and will continue to be?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Does anybody honestly think that Romney and his campaign people are going to be any more dishonest, vile, and manipulative than Obama, his campaign people, and his surrogate media have already been and will continue to be?

Yep. Romney has already shown the 'ability' to lie; why would anyone believe his surrogates would be honest?

 

[Foxfyre]

Does anybody honestly think that Romney and his campaign people are going to be any more dishonest, vile, and manipulative than Obama, his campaign people, and his surrogate media have already been and will continue to be?

Yep. Romney has already shown the 'ability' to lie; why would anyone believe his surrogates would be honest?

Really? And you think Obama, his campaign people, and surrogate media have been more honest? (Psssst. Read more carefully. I have not said anybody was honest yet.)

 

[Meister]

Does anybody honestly think that Romney and his campaign people are going to be any more dishonest, vile, and manipulative than Obama, his campaign people, and his surrogate media have already been and will continue to be?

Yep. Romney has already shown the 'ability' to lie; why would anyone believe his surrogates would be honest?

Really? And you think Obama, his campaign people, and surrogate media have been more honest? (Psssst. Read more carefully. I have not said anybody was honest yet.)

Wry has no integrity when it comes to politics, Foxfyre. He just looks at one side of the coin and swears there isn't another side.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When you can't tell the difference between CPSUA and DNC, where does that put the "Far Left"?

It can only mean that there's no longer a Far Left because the entire Left is out in Little Red Bookland

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yep. Romney has already shown the 'ability' to lie; why would anyone believe his surrogates would be honest?

Really? And you think Obama, his campaign people, and surrogate media have been more honest? (Psssst. Read more carefully. I have not said anybody was honest yet.)

Wry has no integrity when it comes to politics, Foxfyre. He just looks at one side of the coin and swears there isn't another side.

You got that wrong (I'm not surprised); I'm neither blind nor myopic, the problem with your side of the coin is no one on this message board or running for office is able to articulate how cutting taxes, cutting regulations and cutting government actually creates jobs.

Please, in some detail explain the process, your side of the coin. I promise to read it and respond. That said I'm rewiring the garage and will check in between breaks - unless Murphy is in town.

 

[Foxfyre]

Really? And you think Obama, his campaign people, and surrogate media have been more honest? (Psssst. Read more carefully. I have not said anybody was honest yet.)

Wry has no integrity when it comes to politics, Foxfyre. He just looks at one side of the coin and swears there isn't another side.

You got that wrong (I'm not surprised); I'm neither blind nor myopic, the problem with your side of the coin is no one on this message board or running for office is able to articulate how cutting taxes, cutting regulations and cutting government actually creates jobs.

Please, in some detail explain the process, your side of the coin. I promise to read it and respond. That said I'm rewiring the garage and will check in between breaks - unless Murphy is in town.

We saw jobs created under JFK, under Reagan, under Clinton, and under George W. Bush when certain taxes were reduced and certain regulations were eased. Under Reagan and under Clinton and under George H.W. Bush we saw job creation stall and struggle when taxes were increased--and only when taxes were reduced did the job creation really take off.

It's all there on the record. All you have to do is look it up.

Currently we have American businesses sitting on an estimated 3 to 5 trillion dollars in venture capital locally and parked overseas because of the uncertainty in the current USA financial picture. They don't know what the tax structure is going to be, they don't know how much of the capital the government will claim if they put it back into operation, and they don't know what regulations are going to be or how those will affect their businesses. They simply are not going to risk all that they have until those uncertainties are removed.

Every dollar that the government does not confiscate and swallow up in the bureaucracy is a dollar that is available to save so that there is money for others to borrow, or that is availabe to invest so that businesses can start up or existing businesses and expand and grow meaning there will be more jobs. A second grader has enough math skills to see how smaller government makes more money available to grow private commerce and industry that hires people and increases their wages and benefits. Private sector jobs take nothing out of the economy and multiply the wealth. Government jobs take more money out of the economy than they will ever to be able to put back in.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Probably you will, from the far left. There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity; the far right is represented in large numbers.

No one left of center is advocating a radical departure from the past; most of those on the right hope to end Medicare and Social Security and privatize everything. In a huge bit of irony, the middle of the road Democrat is supporting the status quo with few exceptions. It is the far right who are the radicals, who demand change in terms of suppressing the rights of gays/lesbians, unionized workers, voters, immigrants and public employees.

Have middle road Democrats become the new conservatives?

There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity;

are you fucking serious?....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Probably you will, from the far left. There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity; the far right is represented in large numbers.

No one left of center is advocating a radical departure from the past; most of those on the right hope to end Medicare and Social Security and privatize everything. In a huge bit of irony, the middle of the road Democrat is supporting the status quo with few exceptions. It is the far right who are the radicals, who demand change in terms of suppressing the rights of gays/lesbians, unionized workers, voters, immigrants and public employees.

Have middle road Democrats become the new conservatives?

There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity;

are you fucking serious?....

Freddo is serious.

 

[Big Fitz]

Probably you will, from the far left. There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity; the far right is represented in large numbers.

No one left of center is advocating a radical departure from the past; most of those on the right hope to end Medicare and Social Security and privatize everything. In a huge bit of irony, the middle of the road Democrat is supporting the status quo with few exceptions. It is the far right who are the radicals, who demand change in terms of suppressing the rights of gays/lesbians, unionized workers, voters, immigrants and public employees.

Have middle road Democrats become the new conservatives?

There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity;

are you fucking serious?....

Freddo is serious.

He's crazy enough to think HE's a normal everyman and most people think like him.

 

[hortysir]

I don't agree with your premise on the main difference between the parties.

Don't put words in my mouth I didn't utter. I do believe in fiscal responsibility, my belief is rational not emotional, however I don't parrot the propaganda of the right. That does not make me a revolutionary or radical or even a liberal (in the pejorative sense of the word used by the right).

I don't disagree that spending needs to be controlled. I believe our priorities are screwed up and to achieve fiscal sanity we need to have a plan. The Romney plan is to cut taxes, cut regulations and cut government.

I find that to be myopic at best.

Cutting taxes when we are in debt is tantamount to cutting your works hours when bills are due.

A balanced budget amendment is stupid. Ask Alexander Hamilton why.

Not spending on our infrastructure is foolish, the GOP's opposition to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is foolish, myopic and politically motivated. Country First is nothing but a slogan (which I might add the GOP no longer asserts).

Cutting regulations depends on which regulations are to be cut. Allowing our water, air and soil to be polluted is foolish, myopic and is not cost effective.

Cutting government means cutting jobs, we already have a job crisis, why make it worse? If we are to make government smaller, we need to do so by attrition after setting priorities.

But what CUTS do you recommend?

You seem afraid to bring that in.

We can't throw anymore Chinese money at the problems.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There are no far lefties who post on this message board with regularity;

are you fucking serious?....

Freddo is serious.

He's crazy enough to think HE's a normal everyman and most people think like him.

I think. I doubt that you do and I'm certain CrusaderFrank can't.

Prove to me there are fringe lefties who post regularly. Name them and explain in some detail why you believe they are far left.

 

[Big Fitz]

Freddo is serious.

He's crazy enough to think HE's a normal everyman and most people think like him.

I think. I doubt that you do and I'm certain CrusaderFrank can't.

Prove to me there are fringe lefties who post regularly. Name them and explain in some detail why you believe they are far left.

I guess it's smarter to not "think" in any manner you're familiar with then.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I don't agree with your premise on the main difference between the parties.

Don't put words in my mouth I didn't utter. I do believe in fiscal responsibility, my belief is rational not emotional, however I don't parrot the propaganda of the right. That does not make me a revolutionary or radical or even a liberal (in the pejorative sense of the word used by the right).

I don't disagree that spending needs to be controlled. I believe our priorities are screwed up and to achieve fiscal sanity we need to have a plan. The Romney plan is to cut taxes, cut regulations and cut government.

I find that to be myopic at best.

Cutting taxes when we are in debt is tantamount to cutting your works hours when bills are due.

A balanced budget amendment is stupid. Ask Alexander Hamilton why.

Not spending on our infrastructure is foolish, the GOP's opposition to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is foolish, myopic and politically motivated. Country First is nothing but a slogan (which I might add the GOP no longer asserts).

Cutting regulations depends on which regulations are to be cut. Allowing our water, air and soil to be polluted is foolish, myopic and is not cost effective.

Cutting government means cutting jobs, we already have a job crisis, why make it worse? If we are to make government smaller, we need to do so by attrition after setting priorities.

But what CUTS do you recommend?

You seem afraid to bring that in.

We can't throw anymore Chinese money at the problems.

Ah, good question (bad comment after the good question, but I'll respond as if you had a bit of class and left off the last two stupid remarks)

I would order an across the board freeze on hiring and require a written request from any department head who believed S/He needed to replace an employee who retired, quit or died.

I would order a freeze on all non essential off site training (let supervisors and managers do the training in house).

I would order a freeze on all non essential travel.

I would close all Federal Buildings every Friday at 1 PM and reduce salaries across the board an equivalent percentage.

I would order the DEA to remove Marijuana from Schedule I status and allow the states to determine its legality.

I would order each governor who wished to receive federal largess to provide within six months a list of shovel ready projects, the problems such project would mitigate and the number of unemployed citizens such projects would provide, short term and long term.

That's enough for now, most won't read more than three paragraphs in a post and I've way gone past that number.