What do you expect out of your new government?

[Tom]

Here is a challenge to the libers on the board.
You have spoent the last 6 years whinning, cryiung, bithing, spinning, lying, quoting, linking, and generally behaving obnoxiously becuse YOUR ghuys were out of power.

Well, let's say, for the sake of dicussion, you guys WIN next week.
How about using this thread to post a list of SPECIFIC things you expect the dem gov to accomplish in power? Let' s have a documented list of things you say will happend, so we all can refernece it and not have any arguments over what you said or didn't say?

Who will go first.....46 ? Five words or less? :lol:
Ljb - can you come with something not a barb or snide remark?
Hcap - any cartoons sum up your expectations?
Sec......never at a loss for words, got anything to offer postive for a change?

What will the dem gov do to improve America?

Or, will they accomplish nothing?

And what will be the agreed upon indicators of the economy? We need yo have a benchmark and then all agree what the measurables will be each month to monitor progress.

Same thing for Iraq. When will we start pulling out? How long until all troops are home?

When will OBL be captured? What is the timetable for bringing him to justice?

What is the plan for Iran? When can we expect to have the nuclear mess under control?

When will N Korea give up it's nuclear program? We need a specific timetable.


Remeber, if you guys are going to be in charge, we need to do things the way you expected Bush to do them. We will be holding your feet to the fire on every issue. I, for one, have indexed and saved literally hundreds of posts by you guys, cross referenced, filed away neatly, at the ready, just so you dont forget things you have said the last 6 years.



So, who is ready to step up with the first timeline?

[skate]

that's good.

somehow (via the kerry shuffle) they'll explain to us, using a biblical verse, just what they are doing.

coarse, they may be right-on, in that they really do not expect to win

[Secretariat]

What will the dem gov do to improve America?


Get us out of Iraq. Make sure Social Security is not privatized. Make sure the government can negotiate with drug companies to lower prices. Actually get back to securing Afghanistan and getting more troops along the Afgan border. Tell Pakistan we're going in for Bin Laden - Tell Musharaf it's going to happen. Raise the minimum wage. Lobbyist reform. Raise taxes on multi-millionaries to lower the deficit. Push for higher mpg staqndards on trucks and buses and cars. Actually push for an EPA.

Or, will they accomplish nothing?


Well, it will be dififcult because I anticipate they have a chance to win the House but not the Senate, and many in the House are very moderate, not progressive. Bush still holds the executive and hence holds the main power, but there is a chance to keep him from easily pursuing these destructive policies. Even if the Dems accomplish nothing, and prohibit GW from continuing to destroy America, it's a big step.

And what will be the agreed upon indicators of the economy?

For me, lower deficits, a higher median wage, less people on poverty, reduced inflation, less foreclosures, and an unemployment rate below 4% and more importantly a stoppage to the hemmorhaging of manufacturing jobs, are the goals to shoot for.

It'll be tough to do this because the Dem's won't have all the legisture, and the executive and the judical as the Repubs do now, and also in how badly they've messed up. But hopefully, they'll be able to improve things better than what they are now.


Same thing for Iraq. When will we start pulling out? How long until all troops are home?

This is a good question. For me, 6 months to get out of Iraq, but I don't see troops home immediately. I want Afghanistan finished, the poppy crop eradicated, and Taliban addressed. I want OBL dead or alive as promised and forgotten. I want Zawahari caputured or dead and Omar as well. I want the moeny machine which supported Al Queda destroyed. I want the Saudis who donated money to Al Queda pressured to export those reponsible for funding Al Queda sent at least to World Courts for judgment if we can't get them here.



When will OBL be captured? What is the timetable for bringing him to justice?


Unfortunately, we can't address it fully until GW is out in 2008 and we've control of the executive. For me, the timetable is immediately.


What is the plan for Iran? When can we expect to have the nuclear mess under control?

You can't have it under control without the assistance of the Russians and Chinese, unless you invade, and if you invade you may be dealing with Russia and China as well because China wants their oil. This is a matter for the State Department, and the UN to address as is currently happening.


When will N Korea give up it's nuclear program? We need a specific timetable.


We won't know until we actually begin to talk to them rather than ignoring them.


Remeber, if you guys are going to be in charge, we need to do things the way you expected Bush to do them. We will be holding your feet to the fire on every issue. I, for one, have indexed and saved literally hundreds of posts by you guys, cross referenced, filed away neatly, at the ready, just so you dont forget things you have said the last 6 years.


Your'e forgetting one thing Tom. Dem's, even winning will NOT be in charge, but in a position to block some of the insanity that is now taking place by the executive.



So, who is ready to step up with the first timeline?[/QUOTE]

[PlanB]

DEMS don't usually reach for the Bible for solutions; that's a Karl Rove ploy,
to rouse the righteous. Anyways, #1, I would turn up the heat on China, to make them realize that if WE, the USA, make their goods too costly to sell here, well, don't blame us, lol, #2, Perhaps we should REALLY encourage Japan to go nuclear, and hey wait, what about Taiwan too?
#3, Maybe we should just publicly say NO MORE OIL FROM IRAN IN THE USA.
lol, of course we couldn't really police that ploy, but isn't CITGO their phony
outlet? We could make them jumpthrough so many loops that it would cost
them ~5 bucks more per barrel to evade our rules. And of course we could
"harrass" their outlets, auditing them over & over, just for security reasons!!
That's what DEMS might do in the first few months of their power.

[skate]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
What will the dem gov do to improve America?




and then, Sec says;



"Get us out of Iraq. Make sure Social Security is not privatized. Make sure the government can negotiate with drug companies to lower prices. Actually get back to securing Afghanistan and getting more troops along the Afgan border. Tell Pakistan we're going in for Bin Laden - Tell Musharaf it's going to happen. Raise the minimum wage. Lobbyist reform. Raise taxes on multi-millionaries to lower the deficit. Push for higher mpg staqndards on trucks and buses and cars. Actually push for an EPA."


the skate takes a look , and finds;


but, to get out now, would be pulling up at the finish line and at a big big price.

and if we did go into the Market with our Soc. Sec. money, then the Gov would have hands OFF, and we would have been Out of any problems by now.

actually the rest of THE World has been back in Afghanistan, doing just fine. mopping up the talleys.

ya right, raise wages, you were not thinking about trying to stop our industrys from going elewhere, or are you??
so we raise the wages, then what. we increase unemployment benifits (to keep up) we increase soc.sec. and the pension people would not be happy so we need to give them more also, right?
and business people, along with your tax increase would have to simply raise prices to pay for the wage increase , fine with me, can you see what you are promoting. at a time when you cry about business leaving the country.
why do they leave.? maybe, do you think it is because they can find cheaper labor abroad?
some, just, do not seem able to make the connection, its economics and very simple.

what a show that would be, if only one of your ideas were put into effect.
the big "kerry-shuffles", then, "i was just kidding" and " it was all somebody elses fault". we know, we know already.

[skate]

oh yeh, do not forget the insanity.

did ya see the latest bout our economy, hey i would bet that you did not (not your fauult i realize), but any who, the third Q. earnings of USA companys rose 23%, woooow!, yo 23%.
ok, that matches ( with housing bubble et all) the F..rig... Largest 13 Q (in a row)streak of over 10% since , get this, 19f..en50. :cool:

the match was 1992 thru 1995, oh my, another Rep. congress.:sleeping:

[skate]

Planb;


at least , you do have "some" original ideas there, i always like that, thanks.

citgo, might be who Venezuelans use.

Iraq, could be a year, but they'll be moving onto the market soon. China has a big contract getting ready to open with them. and that would be the ball game.

[Secretariat]

the skate takes a look , and finds;

but, to get out now, would be pulling up at the finish line and at a big big price.


Iraq is not a horse race. Hopefully, one day yuo'll figure that out.



and if we did go into the Market with our Soc. Sec. money, then the Gov would have hands OFF, and we would have been Out of any problems by now.

No, you'd be speculating that the market would be rising continually. If GW had put your Soc. Security into the Nasdaq upon entering office, you'd be down, not even up there with inflation. If you put it in the DOW (and who exactly knew?), you'd still show a moderate increase in terms of inflation. Not qutie "out of any problems by now". We saw the mess that occurred in Chile with this. We don't need antoher third world approach to "risking" something that is supposed to be an insurance policy for the elderly. Again, this is a democracy, and every time this quesiton is asked of the people by overwhelming margins they say they don't want privatization, but Irealize GW doesn't care about the will of the people. We've seen that with his current poll numbers at 35% approval.



actually the rest of THE World has been back in Afghanistan, doing just fine. mopping up the talleys.


You obviously haven't heard the latest reports from NATO, or Senator Frist's assessment that the Taliban will have to be left back into the government, or the fact the poppy crop harvest was it's biggest. But keeping living in illusion as Al Queda sits comfortably on the Pakistan border.



ya right, raise wages, you were not thinking about trying to stop our industrys from going elewhere, or are you??


Got news for you. Industries have been going elsewhere for years despite NOT waging the minimum wage and despite lowering benefits. When government passes NAFTA and CAFTA crap it doen't help either. and it's not just manufacturing jobs which is horrendous in terms of loss, it's service jobs as well.



so we raise the wages, then what. we increase unemployment benifits (to keep up) we increase soc.sec. and the pension people would not be happy so we need to give them more also, right?


No, maybe CEO's could take a couple million less than the huge gap they've taken form workers over the last few decades so it's more in lien with 1 to 20 CEO to worker pay ratio instead of the 1 to 500 ratio its become.



and business people, along with your tax increase would have to simply raise prices to pay for the wage increase , fine with me, can you see what you are promoting.

Hey, it's a supposedly free market. At least I have a choice whether to buy their products or not. Don't worry, five Nobel Prize winning economists and 650 of their peers along with the Council of economic Advisors have allayed your fears:

"With the buying power of the Federal minimum wage at its lowest point in 55 years, five Nobel Prize-winning economists have been joined by 650 of their peers, in calling on the Republican-led Congress to increase the minimum wage. Describing the last increase almost 10 years ago as now "fully eroded," the economists said that they agree with a report written in 1999 by the Council of Economic Advisors declaring that "modest increases in the minimum wage have had very little or no effect on employment."

"We believe that a modest increase in the minimum wage would improve the well-being of low-wage workers and would not have the adverse effects that critics have claimed," the economists wrote in a paper delivered this week on a conference call hosted by the Economic Policy Institute, an economic
research group based in Washington, D.C."

Here are the Nobel Prize Winning Economists, but of course you know much mroe than them:

"Nobel Prize winners calling on Republicans to raise the minimum wage are Kenneth Arrow of Stanford University, Lawrence Klein of the University of Pennsylvania, Robert Solow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joseph Stiglitz at Columbia University and Clive Granger of the University of California, San Diego."



at a time when you cry about business leaving the country.
why do they leave.? maybe, do you think it is because they can find cheaper labor abroad?

That's why you make it harder for businesses who use labor abroad (under less than min wage and slave labor type conditions) to sell in our markets. It's the argument of "fair" trade as a part of the "free" trade equation.

It's cheaper to get slaves to do our work abroad, and makes our clothes cheaper, but we rejected slavery in our country years ago becasue "morally" we felt it was wrong. Locating it "offshore" doesn't make it right NO matter the price.




some, just, do not seem able to make the connection, its economics and very simple.


I agree. Some just do not get it.



what a show that would be, if only one of your ideas were put into effect.
the big "kerry-shuffles", then, "i was just kidding" and " it was all somebody elses fault". we know, we know already.

I an tell you one thing that will probabyl be the frist peice fo leigislation passed "if" the Dem's get control of the Congress, and that will be aq no-nonsense minimum wage increase without BS estate tax crap attached to it. That bill will go to the President, and he is going to have to veto it. And when he does his approval rating will go to single digits, and he knows it.

[skate]

Iraq is not a horse race. Hopefully, one day yuo'll figure that out.

SEC'

No, you'd be speculating that the market would be rising continually. If GW had put your Soc. Security into the Nasdaq upon entering office, you'd be down, not even up there with inflation. If you put it in the DOW (and who exactly knew?), you'd still show a moderate increase in terms of inflation. Not qutie "out of any problems by now". We saw the mess that occurred in Chile with this. We don't need antoher third world approach to "risking" something that is supposed to be an insurance policy for the elderly. Again, this is a democracy, and every time this quesiton is asked of the people by overwhelming margins they say they don't want privatization, but Irealize GW doesn't care about the will of the people. We've seen that with his current poll numbers at 35% approval.

skate reply;


a, well, let me add that the market has been rising (what do your nobles say bout that)?, yep, market has been on the increase ever since it started out at 95.00. the plain, stay with the dow and try to figure just how much of an increase , on average you would have, when you reach 12,000.
hey Sec., the dow has never GONE DOWN, it went from 95 to ... just ask yous friends Tom Jeffersons and the Noble boys.




You obviously haven't heard the latest reports from NATO, or Senator Frist's assessment that the Taliban will have to be left back into the government, or the fact the poppy crop harvest was it's biggest. But keeping living in illusion as Al Queda sits comfortably on the Pakistan border.

no, ive not. so you wanna put USA troops back in?... what is your big concern with el Poopy crop, they cutting into your profit. they seem heavy on your mind. comfortably they sit....? what, watching Micheal Moore re-runs.?



Got news for you. Industries have been going elsewhere for years despite NOT waging the minimum wage and despite lowering benefits. When government passes NAFTA and CAFTA crap it doen't help either. and it's not just manufacturing jobs which is horrendous in terms of loss, it's service jobs as well.


Going else where for sure, do not forget they also are coming here, just ask your friendly Noble laureates, by the way do any of your "nobles" come from the number 1 economic country in the f..en world, that would be right about NOW.
gees... i'd have to see a little more than "nobles" , (dont get me wrong ,for the most part, im sure they are fine people sometimes) quote on something especially , just who they are, but some just follow anything...just go off with another quote from what ever...



No, maybe CEO's could take a couple million less than the huge gap they've taken form workers over the last few decades so it's more in lien with 1 to 20 CEO to worker pay ratio instead of the 1 to 500 ratio its become.


oh oh oh ya, and thats gonna happen "why" ??? , cause your Laureates say so?
Hey, please do understand (this is why i ask, 3times, for your direction) i would like to see a $56.00 raise for anybody, fine. but i look at the outcome, ill vote for the $56.00, good goood god aint that easy. yea sir, ive been saying for years , give EVERYBODY whatever they ask for , am i easy. and i guess that would make ME "the skate" the absolute Winner of the Noble Nice Guy Award". huh?



Hey, it's a supposedly free market. At least I have a choice whether to buy their products or not. Don't worry, five Nobel Prize winning economists and 650 of their peers along with the Council of economic Advisors have allayed your fears:

"With the buying power of the Federal minimum wage at its lowest point in 55 years, five Nobel Prize-winning economists have been joined by 650 of their peers, in calling on the Republican-led Congress to increase the minimum wage. Describing the last increase almost 10 years ago as now "fully eroded," the economists said that they agree with a report written in 1999 by the Council of Economic Advisors declaring that "modest increases in the minimum wage have had very little or no effect on employment."

"We believe that a modest increase in the minimum wage would improve the well-being of low-wage workers and would not have the adverse effects that critics have claimed," the economists wrote in a paper delivered this week on a conference call hosted by the Economic Policy Institute, an economic
research group based in Washington, D.C."

Here are the Nobel Prize Winning Economists, but of course you know much mroe than them:

"Nobel Prize winners calling on Republicans to raise the minimum wage are Kenneth Arrow of Stanford University, Lawrence Klein of the University of Pennsylvania, Robert Solow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joseph Stiglitz at Columbia University and Clive Granger of the University of California, San Diego."




That's why you make it harder for businesses who use labor abroad (under less than min wage and slave labor type conditions) to sell in our markets. It's the argument of "fair" trade as a part of the "free" trade equation.

It's cheaper to get slaves to do our work abroad, and makes our clothes cheaper, but we rejected slavery in our country years ago becasue "morally" we felt it was wrong. Locating it "offshore" doesn't make it right NO matter the price.

more controls, huh? is that what your FIVE People out of 6 billion , say about the economy of the USA. just put up Controls, huh, and then the rich people will buckle under.
then all the sudden, we got no Computers, no more steel, no more fuel. hey thats great, as long as your Nobles agree , of coarse.




I agree. Some just do not get it.

Got that right!






I an tell you one thing that will probabyl be the frist peice fo leigislation passed "if" the Dem's get control of the Congress, and that will be aq no-nonsense minimum wage increase without BS estate tax crap attached to it. That bill will go to the President, and he is going to have to veto it. And when he does his approval rating will go to single digits, and he knows it.


and if i was voting (i ask for your direction) id be voting Democrtic. mater of fact , you can have my Vote, free.

now direction is not too tough to handle, it ask for why?, you are on the path you are on.
from what ive been hearing,your answer (i do not wanna put words in your mouth) would be
1- you're running for office
2- you wanna save the world
3-you hate George
4- you believe what you see from the media
5-you are just playing along , with some "not very punctually Noble answer"
i say this because, you keep puting me in a negative posture (ex. wage increase, you did not ask me first), hey $56.00,.. member? see, thats me.
6- you just like being on the other side.

they would indicate some of your direction


i hope you get to read some of the above.
i really Like the part where i say "the Dow Has NEVER Gone Down". cause ya just don't hear things like that from the Nobles of the world, do we.
yep, can not say it has gone down, when it started at $95.00. hasn't ever gone down, and thats me, not Uncle George.

[Secretariat]

and if i was voting (i ask for your direction) id be voting Democrtic. mater of fact , you can have my Vote, free.

now direction is not too tough to handle, it ask for why?, you are on the path you are on.
from what ive been hearing,your answer (i do not wanna put words in your mouth) would be
1- you're running for office
2- you wanna save the world
3-you hate George
4- you believe what you see from the media
5-you are just playing along , with some "not very punctually Noble answer"
i say this because, you keep puting me in a negative posture (ex. wage increase, you did not ask me first), hey $56.00,.. member? see, thats me.
6- you just like being on the other side.

they would indicate some of your direction


i hope you get to read some of the above.
i really Like the part where i say "the Dow Has NEVER Gone Down". cause ya just don't hear things like that from the Nobles of the world, do we.
yep, can not say it has gone down, when it started at $95.00. hasn't ever gone down, and thats me, not Uncle George.

lol....

1. No, not running for office. No intention to ever. Many more qualified than me. However, the policies of the cureent guy are just flat out bad.

2. Nope. Appears that is the necon approach. If I wanted to save the wrold, I'd want to stay in Iraq, which i don't. I'm much more of an isolationist actually. Just interested in American getting fair labor for fair work rather than CEO's getting the huge bonuses..

3. I hate what GW has done for America. I actually think I could have a beer with the guy and crack some jokes at a horse race, but I think he's a dangerous guy for the country.

4. Depends on the media. I certainly don't beleive Limbaugh or Worldnet or any of that crap, and I seek multiple sources to confirm my ideas. I distrust most media such as FOX, CBS with Couric, and Disney ABC. I think Brian Williams tries to be fair but he's a little too conservative to me. I read a lot ,ad especially government reporting websites like the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, and tend to beleive most Nobel Prize winning economists rather than PA posters..

5. I don't think it has to do with noble, just the right thing to do. I just think a lot of working people are struggling while the Exxon Mobils of the world are raking in record profits at their expense.

6. Other side of what? I look at an issue and take a stand. I don't evn know what the side is when I take it. I'm a liberal who is big on veterans issues. I hated Clinton 's stand on NAFTA. I voted for Dole in 96. I'm for national healthcare, and environmental issues, but beleive in gun rights. I take my own stand.

I can't make out what you're saying about the DOW has never gone down, but it doesn't really matter.

We just see things differntly about econmoic policy. That's OK. Not all economists agree. Even Stockman changed his mind about trickle down economics.

[skate]

Sec;

when you state;
"I can't make out what you're saying about the DOW has never gone down, but it doesn't really matter.""




it is me ( i like to term "it") thinking out of the box, for what it is worth.
gees...give it a little time.

when i say the Dow has never gone down, i believe this must be hard to figure because we have never been told this, not even by the Nobles.

look, if you wanna, the Dow started at $95.00 long time ago, and with all the shenanigans , IT is Now $12,000.
people want to look at all the ups and downs, but only one concern remains, and it has gone up forever, because it is at $12,000 now.
as a country, you can Not go wrong with the Dow
Where do your Nobles-friends hang their hats, i'd have to know, in order togive you an answer. because to me, just cause they got an award, it most likely attached to some crappy "in the box thinking", not like my friends "mad Tom" and/or Benny Franklin.