A vision I fundamentally disagree with

[007]

It's not four more years, it's four more beers and obama has no problem buying votes with beer.

What kind of beer ya think obama serves at his beer summits katz, Milwaukees Best? ...

 

[Katzndogz]

obama has no problem with beer or child porn for that matter.

That's what kinda presidebt we have, it's just like he rolls.

 

[swizzlee]

And here's simple "truth" for ya.....

Today's "math" won't be tomorrow's math.

But do hang onto your wishful thinking, bunky

 

[Twofox]

A lively discussion.

BUT the OP was about the difference between Ryan/Romney's vision and how Obama fundamentally disagrees with it.

The question then becomes:

Do you believe we should let the government determine our lives, or do we have the right to do that for ourselves.

I argue that our constitutional republic was setup based on the ideal that we all have inalienable rights bestowed by our creator. Please paraphrase that however you want, but what it means is that humans have inate rights that no government can take away (Not give!).

And that goverment exists to serve the people, and is empowered by the people.

Changing that means that you want to change America fundamentally, meaning that you would have to get rid of our constitution as it stands. Does that amount to treason? Are those people to be considered a domestic threat? Or is it simply an ideological battle? I would argue that it amounts to an domestic threat (I'm undecided on the level of that threat at the moment).

 

[Intense]

Just a Reminder. This is the CDZ. Civil Discourse applies. It takes only 3 Strikes to get permanently removed from here. No Put Downs to Other Posters. No Name Calling.

 

[Ava]

Saturday, Paul Ryan stated the following as the vision that he and Mitt Romney share, along with the comments about the Ideal that America was founded on.

The commitment Mitt Romney and I make to you is this:

We won't duck the tough issues...we will lead!

We won't blame others...we will take responsibility!

We won't replace our founding principles...we will reapply them!

We will honor you, our fellow citizens, by giving you the right and opportunity to make the choice:

What kind of country do we want to have?

What kind of people do we want to be?

We can turn this thing around. Real solutions can be delivered. But, it will take leadership. And the courage to tell you the truth.

Excerpts of Ryan's Speech | The Weekly Standard

Today Obama replied with:

Obama’s compliments, however, contained an implicit criticism. The president called Ryan “an articulate spokesman for Governor Romney’s vision. But it’s a vision that I fundamentally disagree with.”

Obama gives Ryan a double-edged welcome to the race - First Read

Obama wants to replace the ideals that this country was founded on, and replace them with more government, more handouts, less self reliance, etc. He cannot be more clear than that!

Yes, he does, but you have to give the guy some credit. He did not lie about his intentions; rather fooled gullible voters into believing he meant something else. I didn't buy it. In fact, his statement continued my original suspicion of him, based upon his friends and associates and lack of any experience. After the infamous statement by Mrs. Obama, relative to the first time in her life she had been proud of her country, then this proclamation by O., red flags went up, for me, and have since multiplied with actual, actions, as opposed to mere rhetoric.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKxDdxzX0kI]Obama: We Are 5 Days From Fundamentally Transforming America - YouTube[/ame]

 

[swizzlee]

Your abacus is broke, too.............

I'm not a right winger. I'm a registered Indie who is thoroughly sick of the empty promises of a very inexperienced green teen who should have stayed in Chgo.

2+2 still equals 4, bunky.

 

[peach174]

Saturday, Paul Ryan stated the following as the vision that he and Mitt Romney share, along with the comments about the Ideal that America was founded on.

The commitment Mitt Romney and I make to you is this:

We won't duck the tough issues...we will lead!

We won't blame others...we will take responsibility!

We won't replace our founding principles...we will reapply them!

We will honor you, our fellow citizens, by giving you the right and opportunity to make the choice:

What kind of country do we want to have?

What kind of people do we want to be?

We can turn this thing around. Real solutions can be delivered. But, it will take leadership. And the courage to tell you the truth.

Excerpts of Ryan's Speech | The Weekly Standard

Today Obama replied with:

Obama’s compliments, however, contained an implicit criticism. The president called Ryan “an articulate spokesman for Governor Romney’s vision. But it’s a vision that I fundamentally disagree with.”

Obama gives Ryan a double-edged welcome to the race - First Read

Obama wants to replace the ideals that this country was founded on, and replace them with more government, more handouts, less self reliance, etc. He cannot be more clear than that![/QUOTE]

It's called collectivism and it is in both parties.



Yes, he does, but you have to give the guy some credit. He did not lie about his intentions; rather fooled gullible voters into believing he meant something else. I didn't buy it. In fact, his statement continued my original suspicion of him, based upon his friends and associates and lack of any experience. After the infamous statement by Mrs. Obama, relative to the first time in her life she had been proud of her country, then this proclamation by O., red flags went up, for me, and have since multiplied with actual, actions, as opposed to mere rhetoric.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKxDdxzX0kI]Obama: We Are 5 Days From Fundamentally Transforming America - YouTube[/ame]

Add that with what he said when he was elected, "It has taken us 100 years to get here".
It has been their intention to do this from the very beginning and it stared big time with President Taft and Wilson.

 

[Ava]

Saturday, Paul Ryan stated the following as the vision that he and Mitt Romney share, along with the comments about the Ideal that America was founded on.



Today Obama replied with:

Obama wants to replace the ideals that this country was founded on, and replace them with more government, more handouts, less self reliance, etc. He cannot be more clear than that![/QUOTE]

It's called collectivism and it is in both parties.



Yes, he does, but you have to give the guy some credit. He did not lie about his intentions; rather fooled gullible voters into believing he meant something else. I didn't buy it. In fact, his statement continued my original suspicion of him, based upon his friends and associates and lack of any experience. After the infamous statement by Mrs. Obama, relative to the first time in her life she had been proud of her country, then this proclamation by O., red flags went up, for me, and have since multiplied with actual, actions, as opposed to mere rhetoric.

Obama: We Are 5 Days From Fundamentally Transforming America - YouTube

Add that with what he said when he was elected, "It has taken us 100 years to get here".
It has been their intention to do this from the very beginning and it stared big time with President Taft and Wilson.

Yes, it did, Ms. Peach, and progressives can thank FDR and LBJ for propelling it into their wildest dreams, until this coming November when it comes to a screeching halt, before we become Greece. We have been spending money we don't have for too many years, rendering a once great and proud nation, into a subservient, parasitic entitlement-deserving, minded, high percentage of our population.

 

[Zoom-boing]

 

[peach174]

I align with equal opportunity (freedom) like our Founding Fathers.
Prosperity is shared (collectivism) is what always bankrupts countries.

 

[Intense]

I like to view prosperity shared more as a consequential benefit of a rising tide. Roads, Rails, sidewalks, Free Internet Zones, for example benefit those that use them. They are there in the first place because of the rising tide. There are those so bent on either stopping, controlling, taking credit for the rising tide, that all they can do is screw it up, at least the effect on the masses. Of course the Rich will usually, for the most part, have the sense and foresight to rise above the manipulations.

 

[Katzndogz]

I like to view prosperity shared more as a consequential benefit of a rising tide. Roads, Rails, sidewalks, Free Internet Zones, for example benefit those that use them. They are there in the first place because of the rising tide. There are those so bent on either stopping, controlling, taking credit for the rising tide, that all they can do is screw it up, at least the effect on the masses. Of course the Rich will usually, for the most part, have the sense and foresight to rise above the manipulations.

While benefits of roads, rails and sidewalks is a peripheral benefit of a rising tide it is not the kind of shared prosperity that obama means. Someone will use those roads to become prosperous, someone else will sit by the side of the road and beg. obama will take the prosperity of those who use the roads, to give to the beggar.

 

[Vidi]

The fact that so many people think that only ONE of those statements can be true is whats wrong with politics today.

BOTH are true.

Prosperity IS shared. If I do well, I invest my money thus creating jobs and sharing that prosperity with others. Every dollar I spend on products or services shares that prosperity. Everyone has the opportunities but not everyone is in a position to take advantage of those opportunitties so outcomes vary.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Katz hit the nail on the head with her answer to this.

The fact that so many people think that only ONE of those statements can be true is whats wrong with politics today.

BOTH are true.

Prosperity IS shared. If I do well, I invest my money thus creating jobs and sharing that prosperity with others. Every dollar I spend on products or services shares that prosperity. Everyone has the opportunities but not everyone is in a position to take advantage of those opportunitties so outcomes vary.

While benefits of roads, rails and sidewalks is a peripheral benefit of a rising tide it is not the kind of shared prosperity that obama means. Someone will use those roads to become prosperous, someone else will sit by the side of the road and beg. obama will take the prosperity of those who use the roads, to give to the beggar.

 

[Vidi]

Katz hit the nail on the head with her answer to this.

The fact that so many people think that only ONE of those statements can be true is whats wrong with politics today.

BOTH are true.

Prosperity IS shared. If I do well, I invest my money thus creating jobs and sharing that prosperity with others. Every dollar I spend on products or services shares that prosperity. Everyone has the opportunities but not everyone is in a position to take advantage of those opportunitties so outcomes vary.

While benefits of roads, rails and sidewalks is a peripheral benefit of a rising tide it is not the kind of shared prosperity that obama means. Someone will use those roads to become prosperous, someone else will sit by the side of the road and beg. obama will take the prosperity of those who use the roads, to give to the beggar.

No. Katz expressed a biased partisan view. One thats based solely on fear and lies. If that was the view your were hoping to be espoused here, regardless of its complete lack of validity, then, youre not interested in actual debate or conversation and you should refer to my signature for further explaination.

 

[Immanuel]

Except he took two wars off the credit card and put them both ON BUDGET and then gets accused of increasing the debt.

Obamas taking way more responsibility than youre willing to give him credit for and taking way more blame than he deserves.

Prove it!

The only thing I can remember him taking credit for is winning the Nobel Peace Prize and he sure as hell didn't deserve that!

Immie

I just did. He took two wars he didnt start off a credit card for future generations to pay and put them on HIS budgets.

Thats taking reponsibility.


And youre correct on the Peace prize, he sure as hell didnt do anything before or after he got the prize to deserve that honor.

Sorry, he did not take responsibility for the two wars. He did not take the blame for the wars. It can be debated that he did the responsible thing to bring one of those wars to a near end but he did not take responsibility for the wars.

Remember, everything is Bushes fault... everything, from the wars to the collapse in the economy to Obama's inability to improve the economy. It is all Bushes fault. If Bush didn't fart on January 1st 2004, there would not have been the earthquake that caused the earthquake on December 26th, 2004 that led to the tsunami in Indonesia.

Immie

 

[Intense]

The fact that so many people think that only ONE of those statements can be true is whats wrong with politics today.

BOTH are true.

Prosperity IS shared. If I do well, I invest my money thus creating jobs and sharing that prosperity with others. Every dollar I spend on products or services shares that prosperity. Everyone has the opportunities but not everyone is in a position to take advantage of those opportunitties so outcomes vary.

Not when mandated by Government.

 

[Vidi]

The fact that so many people think that only ONE of those statements can be true is whats wrong with politics today.

BOTH are true.

Prosperity IS shared. If I do well, I invest my money thus creating jobs and sharing that prosperity with others. Every dollar I spend on products or services shares that prosperity. Everyone has the opportunities but not everyone is in a position to take advantage of those opportunitties so outcomes vary.

Not when mandated by Government.

Actually YES, when mandated by government.

What do you think the Constitution is? A Private industry document? Its a governmental document.

It amazes me that people can sing the praises of the Constitution whose first function was to form the government of the United States and then in the next breath those same people damn the very government it formed.

 

[Vidi]

Prove it!

The only thing I can remember him taking credit for is winning the Nobel Peace Prize and he sure as hell didn't deserve that!

Immie

I just did. He took two wars he didnt start off a credit card for future generations to pay and put them on HIS budgets.

Thats taking reponsibility.


And youre correct on the Peace prize, he sure as hell didnt do anything before or after he got the prize to deserve that honor.

Sorry, he did not take responsibility for the two wars. He did not take the blame for the wars. It can be debated that he did the responsible thing to bring one of those wars to a near end but he did not take responsibility for the wars.

Remember, everything is Bushes fault... everything, from the wars to the collapse in the economy to Obama's inability to improve the economy. It is all Bushes fault. If Bush didn't fart on January 1st 2004, there would not have been the earthquake that caused the earthquake on December 26th, 2004 that led to the tsunami in Indonesia.

Immie

Well they ARE!

Sheesh...all you have to do to prove it is look at the dates when these things began.

Two wars and a financial collapse all happened PRIOR to January 20th 2009.

Blaming Obama for two wars and the financial collapse is like trying to blame Richard Nixon for the Viet Nam war.

Look at a calendar, man.


You want to say that Obamas policies have EXTENDED this economic crisis. Fine. Ill debate that with you all day long. But to lay the BLAME for it all at his feet is just dishonest.