The ..2012.... Political thread
-
Conservatives have a place. Disagree all you want. Give a little, get a little.
-
Altanon:
Still looking, and nobody there, I guess, on the weekend. Maybe you'll enjoy this (hopefully) entertaining little Graphic Novel about the History of Prohibition while you wait: A Drug War Carol It DOES include references!
Any more details on that story about the police convention and the joint the size of a telephone pole yet?
-
EADG:
Altanon:
Still looking, and nobody there, I guess, on the weekend. Maybe you'll enjoy this (hopefully) entertaining little Graphic Novel about the History of Prohibition while you wait: A Drug War Carol It DOES include references!
Any more details on that story about the police convention and the joint the size of a telephone pole yet?
I sent an e-mail, but no word yet. I haven't forgotten. I guess I need to send another.
-
jaipur:
Conservatives have a place. Disagree all you want. Give a little, get a little.
absolutely. I'm very conservative on a lot of issues -- especially violent crime.
-
"...you keep what's good, and try to improve what you can." I, also, have some Conservative Values. I'll second Violent Crime, and raise you a strongly-supported Second Amendment. Small Government? Hell, how about none - at least at the Federal level? It seems to me, with our current system, we're doing everything twice - at two or three times the cost. It also over-complicates what should be simple. For example, the situation in California regarding Legalized Marijuana. Under the State Law, it will no longer be a crime, but it will remain so under Federal Law. So, which "Law" do we go by? Well, the way it stands, Federal Law trumps State Law, which begs the question: What is the point of having State Representatives and maintaining a State Legislature, if any Laws they Pass are to be potentially invalidated?
-
Altanon:
"...you keep what's good, and try to improve what you can." I, also, have some Conservative Values. I'll second Violent Crime, and raise you a strongly-supported Second Amendment. Small Government? Hell, how about none - at least at the Federal level? It seems to me, with our current system, we're doing everything twice - at two or three times the cost. It also over-complicates what should be simple. For example, the situation in California regarding Legalized Marijuana. Under the State Law, it will no longer be a crime, but it will remain so under Federal Law. So, which "Law" do we go by? Well, the way it stands, Federal Law trumps State Law, which begs the question: What is the point of having State Representatives and maintaining a State Legislature, if any Laws they Pass are to be potentially invalidated?
I'll say this regarding the pointless War On Drugs: Jail does not cure addiction.
-
October 7, 2010 Gallup Finds U.S. Unemployment at 10.1% in September Underemployment, at 18.8%, is up from 18.6% at the end of August http://www.gallup.com/poll/143426/Gallup-Finds-Unemployment-September.aspx
-
72,000 stimulus payments went to dead people Thu Oct 7, 4:19 pm ET By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer $18 million http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101007/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_stimulus_checks_dead_people
-
Altanon:
"...you keep what's good, and try to improve what you can." I, also, have some Conservative Values. I'll second Violent Crime, and raise you a strongly-supported Second Amendment. Small Government? Hell, how about none - at least at the Federal level? It seems to me, with our current system, we're doing everything twice - at two or three times the cost. It also over-complicates what should be simple. For example, the situation in California regarding Legalized Marijuana. Under the State Law, it will no longer be a crime, but it will remain so under Federal Law. So, which "Law" do we go by? Well, the way it stands, Federal Law trumps State Law, which begs the question: What is the point of having State Representatives and maintaining a State Legislature, if any Laws they Pass are to be potentially invalidated?
-
Andy_Shofar:
October 7, 2010 Gallup Finds U.S. Unemployment at 10.1% in September Underemployment, at 18.8%, is up from 18.6% at the end of August http://www.gallup.com/poll/143426/Gallup-Finds-Unemployment-September.aspx
And things were going so well when Obama was elected... In some parts of the country, unemployment is drastically worse. And we're about to give control of the Congress back to the very people who: 1. Created the problem in the first place. 2. Have done nothing to help address the challenges of our country for the last two years.
-
Foreign money put into play to influence US election...our democracy up for sale to the highest bidder
This slime is one of our greatest political problems. Can you make the connection : Foreign governments want people in congress they can influence who will vote to give them favorable conditions for economic trade to the detriment of US econimic interests. The republican party bought and paid for by foreign interests. That is why you have votes like this in the US congress. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/28/AR2010092802768.html Republicans block bill promoting less out-sourcing of american jobs You get what you pay for ...wake up people -
^Everyone is for sale! Both sides & even the middle. I'm from Chicago & I know! LOL!!! People voting more than once...selling senate seats...we got it all.
-
oobu24:
^Everyone is for sale! Both sides & even the middle. I'm from Chicago & I know! LOL!!! People voting more than once...selling senate seats...we got it all.
selling senate seats to foreign powers?...please post a link
-
mustangsally10:
oobu24:
^Everyone is for sale! Both sides & even the middle. I'm from Chicago & I know! LOL!!! People voting more than once...selling senate seats...we got it all.
selling senate seats to foreign powers?...please post a link
I totally did not say that. Don't put words in my mouth. I just said they are all for sale. I didn't say to whom. you did.
-
oobu24:
mustangsally10:
oobu24:
^Everyone is for sale! Both sides & even the middle. I'm from Chicago & I know! LOL!!! People voting more than once...selling senate seats...we got it all.
selling senate seats to foreign powers?...please post a link
I totally did not say that. Don't put words in my mouth. I just said they are all for sale. I didn't say to whom. you did.
you're right, you didn't say that sorry ops: I was reacting to the news of the C of C using foreign funds in our election. True, things have gotten out of control. We desperately need finance reform in our elections but it looks more unlikely everyday. I don't believe that it's all corrupt but there is enough of it that any move for reform will be blocked and the american people pay the price.
-
mustangsally10:
...I don't believe that it's all corrupt ...
Well, that would be where you're wrong; it is corrupt from the bottom to the top, and all points in between. The Election System, itself, now serves to "weed-out" anybody with integrity, decent values or any morals.
-
Altanon:
mustangsally10:
...I don't believe that it's all corrupt ...
Well, that would be where you're wrong; it is corrupt from the bottom to the top, and all points in between. The Election System, itself, now serves to "weed-out" anybody with integrity, decent values or any morals.
Really -- every last decent person who ever considered getting involved in government has been eliminated by "The Election System"? How do you know that? What proof can you offer?
-
My friend said it better than I can:
RachelMorgan:
You gotta realize that the system is broken. Congress is owned by the corporations. Both parties. Wanna know how I know? * every year is an election year whether or not it is. * for a successful bid, you've got to raise $200,000/mo for four months in the off year. * then you need more money for the election year. * so you don't do anything to piss off the financially well off part of your constituency (the three or four people who can get these corporations to donate) * corporations are now a person for campaign contributions. But note that unions are not. The supreme court's ruling was very narrow and limited only to corporations. * corporate interests come first. The fascists have gotten smart. They realized after WWII that dictatorships don't really work. You've got to give an appearance of a democratic republic of some sort. Hence "democratic fascism". Why do I say this? The first thing necessary for a fascist state to succeed is to bust up unions and other labor organizations. They've been substantially weakened. And now are pretty powerless. That happened during the 1980s, and they've gotten weaker and weaker as people are convinced by the corporate propaganda machine over the airwaves to vote against their own interests. They are told that Goldman Sachs are the good guys. That BP is the good guys (Rush is saying the explosion was sabotage by left wingers). How government is bad, except when the corporatists want more government. Fascism is a full cooperation between the corporation and the state. The state exists for the benefit of the corporation. How well is that working out for us? * hence there will be no effective financial reform. not now. not in the immediate future. * there is no both sides of the media. there is only one side. they create the illusion that there are more than one side.
-
Altanon:
My friend said it better than I can:
RachelMorgan:
You gotta realize that the system is broken. Congress is owned by the corporations. Both parties. Wanna know how I know? * every year is an election year whether or not it is. * for a successful bid, you've got to raise $200,000/mo for four months in the off year. * then you need more money for the election year. * so you don't do anything to piss off the financially well off part of your constituency (the three or four people who can get these corporations to donate) * corporations are now a person for campaign contributions. But note that unions are not. The supreme court's ruling was very narrow and limited only to corporations. * corporate interests come first. The fascists have gotten smart. They realized after WWII that dictatorships don't really work. You've got to give an appearance of a democratic republic of some sort. Hence "democratic fascism". Why do I say this? The first thing necessary for a fascist state to succeed is to bust up unions and other labor organizations. They've been substantially weakened. And now are pretty powerless. That happened during the 1980s, and they've gotten weaker and weaker as people are convinced by the corporate propaganda machine over the airwaves to vote against their own interests. They are told that Goldman Sachs are the good guys. That BP is the good guys (Rush is saying the explosion was sabotage by left wingers). How government is bad, except when the corporatists want more government. Fascism is a full cooperation between the corporation and the state. The state exists for the benefit of the corporation. How well is that working out for us? * hence there will be no effective financial reform. not now. not in the immediate future. * there is no both sides of the media. there is only one side. they create the illusion that there are more than one side.
You're kidding, right? That's all you've got as your basis for your simplistic outlook on society? By the way i'm still waiting for the details on that true story you reported a few weeks about about the polcie convention in Cincy.
-
Not all politicians are corrupt...there are many who are real public servants and make careful votes and decisions to benefit their constituents . It's easy to find the corrupt ones ...just follow the money. Case in point... except for wealthy CEOs american people have not benefited from the outsourcing of our manufacturing sector. So when a bill comes up in congress (as it did recently) to reduce the outsourcing of american jobs just look who voted against it and why. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/28/AR2010092802768.html these senators voted against it: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00242 why did they vote against it? Because these people gave money to support their reelection ...it was funneled through the US Chamber of Commerce and notice most contributors are from India http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/13/chamber-foreign-funded-media/ and where does the US export many of their jobs : India of course I think you can correctly assume that the senators who voted against Americans economic interest at this challenging time are corrupt crooks. Easy wasn't that...now notice that the crooks are mostly republicans and bingo you've got it . The republicans are the party of big business and big business doesn't really care about the American people. For the most part big business only does the right thing when they are regulated and made to do so.