I love how the outside world sees PaceAdvantage.com

[PaceAdvantage]

somebody recently posted an inquiry into PA on the TVG community forum...here is how one member (who is also a member here) responded:

I actually have an account there (and have made 29 posts!) and it is a very good website. Many of the posters are intelligent at the game and there are always some good discussions. Even the nuts are always fun to read.

Only problem is that their off topic fourm borders on extremist right.Extremist right... :lol:

Anybody who disagrees with Obama is now an extremist righty I suppose. Tom disagreed with Bush on more than one occasion, I suppose that made him an extremist lefty?

People are funny.

And here I thought all sides are represented here. Silly me.

[Tom]

I am on Bush's case back on the very first Off Topics page in the archives.
But considering they ware on TVG's fourm, I guess you have to allow for a certain amount of...........unconsciousness.:lol:

[DJofSD]

Mike, people see what they want to see.

[ArlJim78]

It seems to me that there are a pretty good number from the "extremist left" here also. funny how people are conditioned to view left as middle of the road, and any conservative views as extremist.

of course with the progressive indoctrination so rampant in our schools not many start out as conservative. They all start out progressive and then switch over once they start to take on some wisdom and think for themselves. sadly though, for far too many, the light never does go on.

[DJofSD]

It seems to me that there are a pretty good number from the "extremist left" here also. funny how people are conditioned to view left as middle of the road, and any conservative views as extremist.

of course with the progressive indoctrination so rampant in our schools not many start out as conservative. They all start out progressive and then switch over once they start to take on some wisdom and think for themselves. sadly though, for far too many, the light never does go on.
The fact that the left views any differing opinions or beliefs as extreme demonstrates how narrow and self-serving they've become in the practice of their religion. It reminds me of the national party in Germany in the 1920's - '40's.

[46zilzal]

objective evaluation

[PhantomOnTour]

The off topic forums aren't 'extremist right' dominated....i find that they lean to the right or they lean toward conservative viewpoints, but the word 'extremist' is inaccurate.

[Tom]

objective evaluation
What is the objective criteria?

[Robert Goren]

As unabashed liberal, I will say that there are more than enough liberals here. Although I will also say that there is no one here from the far left. I know some of the more conservative posters like to think that there is, but that is because they have never met anyone that is far left. Anyone who post here is tame compared to those people.

[DJofSD]

As unabashed liberal, I will say that there are more than enough liberals here. Although I will also say that there is no one here from the far left. I know some of the more conservative posters like to think that there is, but that is because they have never met anyone that is far left. Anyone who post here is tame compared to those people.
You assume wrongly.

[46zilzal]

As unabashed liberal, I will say that there are more than enough liberals here. Although I will also say that there is no one here from the far left. I know some of the more conservative posters like to think that there is, but that is because they have never met anyone that is far left. Anyone who post here is tame compared to those people.
Having waded through the morons of the 60's who wanted radical change through violence (Students of a Democratic Society, the SDS) I agree there are none like that which sets the definition of far out there.

[Dave Schwartz]

Only problem is that their off topic fourm borders on extremist right.

If the poster said, "PA is predominantly to the right side politically," I would tend to agree. I'd bet that of the top 200 posters (in off-topic) it is about 75% right.


Consider what that says about the horse player: "I really only expect to get what I earn."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Tom]

Having waded through the morons of the 60's who wanted radical change through violence (Students of a Democratic Society, the SDS) I agree there are none like that which sets the definition of far out there.

Oh, you mean Obama's heroes and mentors.

[mostpost]

There are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:


I forgot. Newtothegame posts here. Sorry Newt, almost left you out of the right wing wacko list. Nothing personal. ;)

[DJofSD]

There are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:




This response makes little sense and introduces a lot of non sequitors.

Stay on point.

[mostpost]

This response makes little sense and introduces a lot of non sequitors.

Stay on point.
I think it is perfectly clear to anyone with any sense.

[boxcar]

There are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:


I forgot. Newtothegame posts here. Sorry Newt, almost left you out of the right wing wacko list. Nothing personal. ;)

If redistribution of income, isn't socialism, then explain to us what socialism is.
Enlighten us, Mr. Mosty.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

If redistribution of income, isn't socialism, then explain to us what socialism is.
Enlighten us, Mr. Mosty.

Boxcar
Thank you for the reminder. I forgot to add: There are those who think helping others is Socialism posting here.

[ArlJim78]

mostpost, obsessed with the perceived inaccuracies by some commenters on a horse racing blog, but at the same time, apparently completely not interested in the voluminous and well documented quantity of lies told each and every day by the president he worships.

afterall, even the New York Times is now getting in on the action:

"Contrary to the what President Obama told crowd after crowd, the Affordable Care Act does not immediately mandate that insurers offer coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. It only says any coverage that is offered to children cannot include exclusions for the treatment of such conditions. "

[boxcar]

Thank you for the reminder. I forgot to add: There are those who think helping others is Socialism posting here.

You dodged the question. Tell us, then, what socialism is. Give us the Mosty definition. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[mostpost]

If redistribution of income, isn't socialism, then explain to us what socialism is.
Enlighten us, Mr. Mosty.

Boxcar
"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response. It is supposed to divide us into the responsible wage earner who is being forced to help the irresponsible slacker who refuses to earn his own way. This is the case in only a very small percentage of the cases.
The way in which wealth is now distributed is determined by the people who already have the most wealth. They determine that distribution in the way that is most favorable to them. Not just most favorable, but most favorable out of all proportion to their contribution. As a result of this control, some people must work for much less than what they have earned and some people do not have the oppportunity to earn anything at all.
Since, under the present system, we can not completely control what a business pays its employees, we use their tax money to help the less fortunate.

In other words we make them do what they should have done voluntarily.
You are going to say, "I give plenty to charity and I decide who is worthy of my charity." That may be true, or it may not, but do you know everyone who is "worthy" of your charity. If you give $10,000 in charitable contributions each year that is barely enough to provide for one family at the poverty level. So, whatever you do is not enough.
If you think this is socialism, so be it. Everything Socialist isn't bad; everything Capitalist isn't good. Everything that is done by the government isn't Socialism.

[mostpost]

You dodged the question. Tell us, then, what socialism is. Give us the Mosty definition. :rolleyes:

Boxcar
Asked and answered. Try to be a little more patient. :bang:

[46zilzal]

Asked and answered. Try to be a little more patient. :bang:
how about Co-operation in some things for the overall greater good. Just like the public health department : advice, counseling, vaccinations, pre natal and post natal instruction courses, diabetic screening, Keep fit classes for all ages, anonymous STD testing and care, the list goes on and on and is just one example of how working together helps everyone.

[Tom]

"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response.

It is what it is, it is what Obama called it, is is what over dems are calling it. What part of the phrase do not understand?

[Tom]

how about Co-operation in some things for the overall greater good. Just like the public health department : advice, counseling, vaccinations, pre natal and post natal instruction courses, diabetic screening, Keep fit classes for all ages, anonymous STD testing and care, the list goes on and on and is just one example of how working together helps everyone.

And just what "work" is provided by those on the receiving end of the deal?
My tax money is stolen from me and given to someone else. What is his contribution? Working together assumes something from each side. Where is it?

[DJofSD]

I think it is perfectly clear to anyone with any sense.
Sorry, I am not a psychologist.

[PaceAdvantage]

Do we really have to go down another road in this thread? Why not just keep to the point.

Here's how I see it. All views are represented here. You have folks on the right posting, and folks on the left posting.

Where exactly is the ongoing thread about "birthers?" Someone please point out the thread that the "birthers" have kept going.

It seems to me, the only people mentioning "birthers" are mostpost, hcap and whatever other left leaner who wishes to bring the subject up.

What percentage of posters here think Obama is Muslim? I have no clue. But I do know that in poll after poll taken, 10-12% of Americans think he is Muslim...to this day...can you label 12% of the population extremist? If so, that's a pretty large chunk for a "fringe" group, don't you think?

For the record, I don't believe he is Muslim. And while we're at it, it isn't against the Constitution to have a Muslim president, is it? Then again, it isn't against the Constitution to have a Roman Catholic president either, and we've only had one of those if I'm not mistaken. Maybe I'll start labeling Obama a Roman Catholic and see what happens.... :lol:

I don't think for one second that off-topic here can accurately be labeled "extremist right." Those doing so are either seriously misinformed or have some other agenda.

[mostpost]

how about Co-operation in some things for the overall greater good. Just like the public health department : advice, counseling, vaccinations, pre natal and post natal instruction courses, diabetic screening, Keep fit classes for all ages, anonymous STD testing and care, the list goes on and on and is just one example of how working together helps everyone.
SOCIALISM ITS ALL SOCIALISM COMMUNIST COLLECTIVIST SOCIALISM
OH. sorry 46, Boxcar must have hacked into my computer. :rolleyes:

[46zilzal]

We have a great example of a co -op which keeps prices down and has good products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Equipment_Co-op

What are things like Costco??, cooperative organizations to keep prices down. They are everywhere.

[DJofSD]

As I recall, when JFK was elected, there was a lot of hand wringing the Pope would now be controlling the US.

Has any one said Obama would be controlled by some foreign interests?

[DJofSD]

We have a great example of a co -op which keeps prices down and has good products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Equipment_Co-op

What are things like Costco??, cooperative organizations to keep prices down. They are everywhere.
Yes, and I belong to REI.

However, comparing these to companies to the effort to make health care a co-op is misguided.

A co-op is not mandated nor is my membership.

[Leonard]

We have a great example of a co -op which keeps prices down and has good products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Equipment_Co-op

What are things like Costco??, cooperative organizations to keep prices down. They are everywhere.

I wouldn't describe Costco as a "cooperative organization." More like a publicly traded company engaged in capitalism.

[boxcar]

"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response. It is supposed to divide us into the responsible wage earner who is being forced to help the irresponsible slacker who refuses to earn his own way. This is the case in only a very small percentage of the cases.
The way in which wealth is now distributed is determined by the people who already have the most wealth. They determine that distribution in the way that is most favorable to them. Not just most favorable, but most favorable out of all proportion to their contribution. As a result of this control, some people must work for much less than what they have earned and some people do not have the oppportunity to earn anything at all.
Since, under the present system, we can not completely control what a business pays its employees, we use their tax money to help the less fortunate.

In other words we make them do what they should have done voluntarily.
You are going to say, "I give plenty to charity and I decide who is worthy of my charity." That may be true, or it may not, but do you know everyone who is "worthy" of your charity. If you give $10,000 in charitable contributions each year that is barely enough to provide for one family at the poverty level. So, whatever you do is not enough.
If you think this is socialism, so be it. Everything Socialist isn't bad; everything Capitalist isn't good. Everything that is done by the government isn't Socialism.

You truly have a reading comp problem. I still don't know what you think Socialism is! :bang: :bang:

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Do we really have to go down another road in this thread? Why not just keep to the point.

Here's how I see it. All views are represented here. You have folks on the right posting, and folks on the left posting.
No one says you are censoring views. Certainly I don't. There are many more entries here that lean right than lean left. A typical thread starts with some righty posting something they found at Hot Air or Breitbart or CNS. This is followed by many other righties commenting how our liberties are being stolen and Obama is a secret communist and a POS. Then Hcap or NJ or Robert Goren or I come in and disprove the allegations. After this we are accused of being propagandists for the administration. Eventually we despair of convincing you all of the truth and move on. There is only so much a few people can do.
Where exactly is the ongoing thread about "birthers?" Someone please point out the thread that the "birthers" have kept going.
Using the term "Ongoing thread is disingenuous" A search of the term "Birth certificate" yields 91 results. Yes, some of them are from Hcap or me, but generally in respose to someone from the right who has initiated the discussion.
It seems to me, the only people mentioning "birthers" are mostpost, hcap and whatever other left leaner who wishes to bring the subject up.

What percentage of posters here think Obama is Muslim? I have no clue. But I do know that in poll after poll taken, 10-12% of Americans think he is Muslim...to this day...can you label 12% of the population extremist? If so, that's a pretty large chunk for a "fringe" group, don't you think?

For the record, I don't believe he is Muslim. And while we're at it, it isn't against the Constitution to have a Muslim president, is it? Then again, it isn't against the Constitution to have a Roman Catholic president either, and we've only had one of those if I'm not mistaken. Maybe I'll start labeling Obama a Roman Catholic and see what happens.... :lol:
If 90% of the people beleive something and that something is wrong and that something is being used to denigrate a person or group then those that 90% is extremist.
I don't think for one second that off-topic here can accurately be labeled "extremist right." Those doing so are either seriously misinformed or have some other agenda.
A more accurate way to describe off topic is that most of those who post here from the right espouse an extreme right view. And a majority, though not all, of those who post here are from the right.

[Robert Goren]

I would hope the outside world would not judge this site by the off topic forum, but by the horse racing related forums. If it does that, then the site gets an A+. NJMO

[DJofSD]

Alice == the "righty's"

Humpty Dumpty == Mostposts

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.'

[PaceAdvantage]

A more accurate way to describe off topic is that most of those who post here from the right espouse an extreme right view. And a majority, though not all, of those who post here are from the right.If there are no ongoing threads about the "birthers" or "birth certificate issue," then why have you and hcap brought the term up more than a few times lately?

My point was, none of the righties continue to harp on this issue..but you guys do...almost as if you don't want to let it go...or like you want to make it SEEM like that is some sort of big issue here in off-topic land...which it isn't.

[BenDiesel26]

The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:


Up until about a week or so ago you had absolutely no idea that when Bill Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, at the time it was the largest tax cut since Reagan in 1981. You apparently didn't even know it existed. So it's funny you talk about accuracy--you simply ignore posts when you are wrong, like your post on the fifth amendment yesterday that stated delegates are selected by congress.

[boxcar]

Up until about a week or so ago you had absolutely no idea that when Bill Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, at the time it was the largest tax cut since Reagan in 1981. You apparently didn't even know it existed. So it's funny you talk about accuracy--you simply ignore posts when you are wrong, like your post on the fifth amendment yesterday that stated delegates are selected by congress.

And he's infamous for ignoring posts for which he can't come up with an answer. I wish I had a nickle for every one! At the end of the day, Mosty is just another liberal empty suit...albeit lovable, but Most[l]y all sizzle and virtually no substance.

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

I dare say the suit is not the only empty thing.

[46zilzal]

I wouldn't describe Costco as a "cooperative organization." More like a publicly traded company engaged in capitalism.
members only

[Leonard]

members only

That anyone can join.

[boxcar]

That anyone can join.

...or choose not to. Zil, can you wrap your mind around this reality?

Zil, a society is only as free as the fewest number of shackles the state puts on our choices.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

...or choose not to. Zil, can you wrap your mind around this reality?

Zil, a society is only as free as the fewest number of shackles the state puts on our choices.

Boxcar
Strange by your definition I live a one of those SOCIALIST dens and have never had a single limitation on my freedom and enjoy tax free race track winnings all the time as well.

[BlueShoe]

Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right.I forgot. Newtothegame posts here. Sorry Newt, almost left you out of the right wing wacko list. Nothing personal. ;)
Hey Mosty, you left me out! How could you have left me off of your Right Wing Loon List? My feelings are hurt, really hurt. And here I thought that I was one of the most Conservative posters on the forum. Guess that I will just have to shift even more to the Right than in the past. After all, I do have a reputation to uphold.

[DJofSD]

Oh oh, a conservative from Orange County, CA. Watch out or you'll be labeled as a member of an old radical organization.

[BlueShoe]

Oh oh, a conservative from Orange County, CA. Watch out or you'll be labeled as a member of an old radical organization.
Zilly had that one covered some time ago.

[rastajenk]

I feel slighted too. Brevity may be the soul of wit, but it won't get you on Post Toastie's Most Wanted List. Maybe another 35,000 contributions or so will do the trick. :D

[mostpost]

Hey Mosty, you left me out! How could you have left me off of your Right Wing Loon List? My feelings are hurt, really hurt. And here I thought that I was one of the most Conservative posters on the forum. Guess that I will just have to shift even more to the Right than in the past. After all, I do have a reputation to uphold.
Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa! ETA Also to you Rastejenek

[hcap]

There is no question the right dominates PA off topic. Forget far right and far left, the right here outnumbers the left maybe 4 to 1.
Just look at the posters in this thread.

I have maintained this since posting against the Iraq war, and being shouted down my a multiple gang of bush
sycophants

[PaceAdvantage]

There is no question the right dominates PA off topic. Forget far right and far left, the right here outnumbers the left maybe 4 to 1.
Just look at the posters in this thread.

I have maintained this since posting against the Iraq war, and being shouted down my a multiple gang of bush
sycophantsWhatever man...can you point me out the ongoing righty dominated "birthers" thread...for starters...

I thought not...but you're one of the ones who continues to bring up the "birthers" here...not the "righty dominators"

I guess this counts as a "shout down" right hcap? :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

Strange by your definition I live a one of those SOCIALIST dens and have never had a single limitation on my freedom and enjoy tax free race track winnings all the time as well.

Of course you have. You just don't know it or want to recognize it. And naturally when you're in agreement with public policy, you would find no violation of your individual liberties. (Duh!) Whenever the state mandates what its citizens can buy, sell or consume, you've had shackles placed upon your choices, whether you know it or not. When the U.S. government dictates to me that I must buy health coverage against my will, they have removed that choice from me. Therefore, they have infringed upon my freedom of choice. And...freedom of CHOICE is the rock bottom, fundamental freedom of all! Nothing is more basic to Freedom than Choice. Choice even trumps Speech, because before I speak, I make a conscious choice to so. Before I take any action, I make a conscious, deliberate choice to do so.

Freedom is a two lane highway. In a free society we should be free to act as well as be from others' actions that would infringe upon my freedom to act. I should be free FROM all coercive government mandates because those mandates militate against my freedom TO choose. I should be free FROM the state confiscating my private property (money I have earned_ for unconstitutional purposes, i.e. to redistribute to whom it deems worthy, which in very many cases would be those who have no interest in earning their own! Government should be in the business of protecting my private property rights; instead, it writes wicked laws that empowers it to violate those rights by stealing from me -- in the names of the "public welfare" or "public good"! This too, is a serious infringement on my personal liberties.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

Well Norris I thought you died, but clones are around all the time I suppose.

Norris served as a great bad example to me when I was growing up, and he was JUST LIKE YOU.

[boxcar]

There is no question the right dominates PA off topic. Forget far right and far left, the right here outnumbers the left maybe 4 to 1.
Just look at the posters in this thread.

I have maintained this since posting against the Iraq war, and being shouted down my a multiple gang of bush
sycophants

That's only because you Lefties haven't figured out how to transform the Disease of Liberalism into an airborne virus. Thank God for very BIG favors and for the fact that normal people's mental immune system will reject it!

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Well Norris I thought you died, but clones are around all the time I suppose.

Norris served as a great bad example to me when I was growing up, and he was JUST LIKE YOU.

...another liberal who can't get his mind to intellectually engage in conversation.

And Norris has been your imaginary playmate for how long, again? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Up until about a week or so ago you had absolutely no idea that when Bill Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, at the time it was the largest tax cut since Reagan in 1981. You apparently didn't even know it existed. So it's funny you talk about accuracy--you simply ignore posts when you are wrong, like your post on the fifth amendment yesterday that stated delegates are selected by congress.
You mean accuracies like when you say the fifth amendment and you are referring to Article 5. Article five deals with methods of amending the Constitution. Article five says nothing about how the delegates to the convention shall be chosen, if a convention is called. The information I alluded to was from the article I linked. An article which was cautioning conservatives against demanding a Constitutional Convention.
Each state has its own method of selecting delegates to a state ratifying convention. But that is not the same as a National Constitutional Convention.

I should not have taken the word of the article's author. But even assuming that each state be allowed to select delegates according to each state's desire, you will find that the country is a whole lot less conservative than you think.

[mostpost]

And he's infamous for ignoring posts for which he can't come up with an answer. I wish I had a nickle for every one! At the end of the day, Mosty is just another liberal empty suit...albeit lovable, but Most[l]y all sizzle and virtually no substance.

Boxcar
After a while it is pointless to continue arguing with you. If I post something from a source and you say the source is unreliable, it is pointless to go back and forth. If I define something in a certain way, and you disagree with my definitiion it is pointless to keep repeating my definition in hopes of wearing you down. And it soes not matter that my definition is widely accepted or from the dictionary or some such source.
Specifically as to your "What is my definition of Socialism?" rant. In my view Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are controlled by the group; whether that group be the government or the workers in a particular industry. You want to expand that definition to include any actions taken by the government to benefiot the citizens. i.e. Social Security, Medicare, OSHA. Doing things for the people that they cannot do well individually is not Socialism it is good government. An individual worker can't tell his boss that the assembly line is unsafe, he would be fired. The government can come in and fine the company and the assembly line will be upgraded. An elderly person can not afford to pay all their menical bills themselves. But through Medicare, which they contributed to all their working lives, these things can be taken care of.

I don't have to ask your definition of Socialism. It is any kind of government involvement in any aspect of your life. Unless your house is on fire. Or your Lamburgereenee is being stolen. Or the street in front of your castle needs repair. In other words stay out of your life unless we can help you and don't expect you to help us.

[Greyfox]

"What is my definition of Socialism?" .

An ant hill.

[ArlJim78]

"how the outside world sees PaceAdvantage"?

It makes it sound like at Paceadvantage we're all cooped up somewhere in a secret underground bunker hidden away from society.

[mostpost]

Up until about a week or so ago you had absolutely no idea that when Bill Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, at the time it was the largest tax cut since Reagan in 1981
If I didn't know about it, it was because it wasn't relevant to me, nor was it relevant to most Americans. The top 20% pay 97.5% of Capital gains taxes. They were the ones who benefitted. Any on earning less than $72,000 a year benefitted little if at all.
Details here:
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/regcg.pdf

[canleakid]

PROPER TERMINOLOGY

"RADICAL RIGHTY" AND "LOONY LEFTY" :lol: THAT BE US :lol:

[bigmack]

There is no question the right dominates PA off topic. Forget far right and far left, the right here outnumbers the left maybe 4 to 1.
Brace yourself

CIA1fcnDx4E

[mostpost]

"how the outside world sees PaceAdvantage"?

It makes it sound like at Paceadvantage we're all cooped up somewhere in a secret underground bunker hidden away from society.
Like St. Elsewhere we all exist only in the mind of an autistic child named Mike. :eek: :eek: :eek:

[BlueShoe]

Well Norris I thought you died, but clones are around all the time I suppose.

Norris served as a great bad example to me when I was growing up, and he was JUST LIKE YOU.
I think I know who Norris is, so am going to take a shot. Zilly spent his early years in SoCal, and from his many posts have a rough idea about how old he is. So Zilly, is your Norris, by chance, the former late mayor of Los Angeles, C. Norris Poulson? State Assemblyman, Congressman, mayor of LA from 1953-1961. In 1959, he embarrassed Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev in public, an event for which he is often recalled. So Zilly, is mayor Poulson your childhood bogeyman, or is it someone else?

[Space Monkey]

here are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy.

Spot on Most. I made the big mistake of defending our President and criticizing the right wing media here. I was surprised at the venom that was sent my way. This off topic section is VERY right wing. If 0 is moderate and 10 is extreme, the people here are about an 8 in my opinion. I've heard that Bush kept us safe for 8 years until Obama got in office. I've heard that the Dems forced :lol: Bush to sign the banking bill that caused the housing crisis. I've heard that everything is Clinton's fault, and of course the tired fear mongering association with his old pastor who he has denounced. Its funny how most people don't realize how extreme they are. The biggest problem I have with the most sensible of the right is that they believe if the government does ANYTHING to help the people of this country, its socialism. How sad really.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... Its funny how most people don't realize how extreme they are...


I know, right? Just recently we had someone posting about how Republican leaders were encouraging people to spit on black people and direct racial slurs at them. That guy was delusionally enfatuated with his extreme perspective on things.

[ArlJim78]

I know, right? Just recently we had someone posting about how Republican leaders were encouraging people to spit on black people and direct racial slurs at them. That guy was delusionally enfatuated with his extreme perspective on things.
outrageous. I hope that person was banned for spreading such falsehoods and hatred.

[boxcar]

Spot on Most. I made the big mistake of defending our President and criticizing the right wing media here. I was surprised at the venom that was sent my way. This off topic section is VERY right wing. If 0 is moderate and 10 is extreme, the people here are about an 8 in my opinion. I've heard that Bush kept us safe for 8 years until Obama got in office. I've heard that the Dems forced :lol: Bush to sign the banking bill that caused the housing crisis. I've heard that everything is Clinton's fault, and of course the tired fear mongering association with his old pastor who he has denounced. Its funny how most people don't realize how extreme they are. The biggest problem I have with the most sensible of the right is that they believe if the government does ANYTHING to help the people of this country, its socialism. How sad really.

He didn't denounce his former pastor. He simply tossed him under the bus by distancing himself from him (and even then only as a last resort after he told everyone that he never those sermons). Funny how that took 20 years to do, isn't it? Every wonder why he waited so long? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. Please don't tell me he had an "epiphany" moment during his campaign.

[Greyfox]

I think I know who Norris is, so am going to take a shot.

I'd guess Norris was a rigid army worshipping step-father.

[boxcar]

"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response. It is supposed to divide us into the responsible wage earner who is being forced to help the irresponsible slacker who refuses to earn his own way.

I'd love to hear your spin on this. According to your own words, Howard Dean and his hairy horde of other Dem(on)s must be bent on dividing Americans.

http://baarswestside.blogspot.com/2010/03/howard-dean-obama-care-is-income.html

Btw, I'm still waiting for you tell us what you think Socialism IS. (Please dont regurgitate what you don't think it is. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: )

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

He didn't denounce his former pastor. He simply tossed him under the bus by distancing himself from him (and even then only as a last resort after he told everyone that he never those sermons). Funny how that took 20 years to do, isn't it? Every wonder why he waited so long? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. Please don't tell me he had an "epiphany" moment during his campaign.
you got that right. here is an excerpt from National Reviews (http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzI4MjQ3Mzk4MWJkNDkwNWZlYzcwNDA3NmQyNmIxYmI=)ha ndy guide to Obama's statements with expiration dates.
_______________________________________________
STATEMENT: "I could no more disown Jeremiah Wright than I could disown my own grandmother."

—Barack Obama, March 18, 2008

EXPIRATION DATE: on April 28, 2008, cut all ties to Wright, declaring, “based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought.”

STATEMENT: Obama said that his church, “Trinity United "embodies the black community in its entirety" and that his church was being caricatured on March 18, 2008.

EXPIRATION DATE: On May 31, 2008, Obama resigned his membership at Trinity United Church.

[Space Monkey]

boxcar, when are you going to get it thru your head that 95% of america doesn't give a damn about Wright? You are one of the extremists I was talking about. There's no debate with you at all. I haven't read 1 post by you that doesn't completely denounce the opposing view. I've criticized Clinton's NAFTA agreement, called Obama a corportist and I haven't gotten 1 positive comment from any of you righties here. That leads me to believe that you are all Limbaugh/Beck/Hannnity/Coulter/Savage puppets. You're driven by their hate speech. I am not a fellow American to you. I am the enemy. Thats destructive to our society. Thats what the right wing, hate speech media is doing to this country.

Thanks for the support NJSTINKS :ThmbUp:

[Space Monkey]

Hey johnnabil, Bachman was holding a picture of Pelosi and slapping her face while the people below were spitting and calling out racial slurs at democratic congressman. Thats fact. Bachman was inciting people to violence. Thats borderline criminal.

[Space Monkey]

The republicans give big tax breaks to the top 2%. Then they convince mindless lower and middle class Americans that they are doing everything for them and the schmucks believe it. When Democrats get in, they try to give the breaks back to the lower and middle class and then Republicans cry how the Democrats are socialists and are redistributing the wealth. The liberals are communists, socialists, and the same schmucks believe it while the right keeps raking in the dough. They are laughing at all the lower and middle class Americans that they are screwing to the max. For anybody thats not in the top 2%, its called being a sucker.

[mostpost]

I'd love to hear your spin on this. According to your own words, Howard Dean and his hairy horde of other Dem(on)s must be bent on dividing Americans.

http://baarswestside.blogspot.com/2010/03/howard-dean-obama-care-is-income.html

Btw, I'm still waiting for you tell us what you think Socialism IS. (Please dont regurgitate what you don't think it is. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: )

Boxcar
If Dean wants to use the phrase redistribution of income, I can't stop him. The point is that this is not redistribution from some fair and equitable middle ground but from a system where everything is in favor of a privileged class.
And I am not going to to answer your Socialism question again. I think I answered sufficiently in #57. Of course this is your typical Modus Operandi to ignore what you don;tagree with and ask thesame question over and over even when it has been answered.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Its funny how most people don't realize how extreme they are...

Now seems like an appropriate time to reiterate how much I agree with you on this point. :ThmbUp:

[mostpost]

The republicans give big tax breaks to the top 2%. Then they convince mindless lower and middle class Americans that they are doing everything for them and the schmucks believe it. When Democrats get in, they try to give the breaks back to the lower and middle class and then Republicans cry how the Democrats are socialists and are redistributing the wealth. The liberals are communists, socialists, and the same schmucks believe it while the right keeps raking in the dough. They are laughing at all the lower and middle class Americans that they are screwing to the max. For anybody thats not in the top 2%, its called being a sucker.
Nice to have you here. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:
Pretty soon some one on TVG will be saying how the board is dominted by left wing extremists. :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

boxcar, when are you going to get it thru your head that 95% of america doesn't give a damn about Wright? You are one of the extremists I was talking about. There's no debate with you at all. I haven't read 1 post by you that doesn't completely denounce the opposing view. I've criticized Clinton's NAFTA agreement, called Obama a corportist and I haven't gotten 1 positive comment from any of you righties here. That leads me to believe that you are all Limbaugh/Beck/Hannnity/Coulter/Savage puppets. You're driven by their hate speech. I am not a fellow American to you. I am the enemy. Thats destructive to our society. Thats what the right wing, hate speech media is doing to this country.

Thanks for the support NJSTINKS :ThmbUp:

Really? Can you substantiate that number? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Of course, you don't give two flips because the teachings of that "church" (and I cringe when I use that term because any resemblance between Christ's church and that one is purely coincidental) are pretty Marxist-oriented, politically and socially divisive and filled with hate-speech. Why in the world would you care about that? :rolleyes: You'd love attending to suck it all up like BO did for 20+ years.

And whenever I denounce something, I do so on the merits of the case or situation. There's no redeeming value to BLT. It has no place in any church that calls itself "Christian". So, yes, without reservation, I unabashedly denounce BLT and any church that adheres to that hell hole rubbish.

Boxcar
P.S. Now, perhaps, you know the difference between true denouncements and the crap with which you libs try to credit BO.

[boxcar]

If Dean wants to use the phrase redistribution of income, I can't stop him. The point is that this is not redistribution from some fair and equitable middle ground but from a system where everything is in favor of a privileged class.[
And I am not going to to answer your Socialism question again. I think I answered sufficiently in #57. Of course this is your typical Modus Operandi to ignore what you don;tagree with and ask thesame question over and over even when it has been answered.

But it is redistribution. Thank you for finally admitting that! But now you wish to mitigate your admission with the ol' victimization ploy.

It's redistributing the fruit of one group's labor to another who have not earned it. So, then according to you, it would be morally justifiable for me to contract with a proxy to have him strong arm money any way he sees fit from my better heeled, employed next store neighbor with instructions that he's to give a percentage of the proceeds to some poor schlep living down the block because that guy isn't nearly as well heeled as my next door neighbor? I take it that you'd be okay with that?

Boxcar

[hcap]

So far this thread alone....

Righties.....13

PA,Tom, DJofSD, ArlJim78, Dave Schwartz, boxcar,
Leonard, BenDiesel26, BlueShoe, rastajenk, Greyfox, bigmack, johnhannibalsmith


Lefties........5

46zilzal, Robert Goren, mostpost, hcap, Space Monkey


Not sure.......

PhantomOnTour

[PhantomOnTour]

Me neither :)

[boxcar]

So far this thread alone....

Righties.....13

PA,Tom, DJofSD, ArlJim78, Dave Schwartz, boxcar,
Leonard, BenDiesel26, BlueShoe, rastajenk, Greyfox, bigmack, johnhannibalsmith


Lefties........5

46zilzal, Robert Goren, mostpost, hcap, Space Monkey


Not sure.......

PhantomOnTour

Again, only because normal people's mental immune systems violently reject the logically twisted and irrational perversions of Liberalism. The first group above are truly the "chosen ones" because our enlightened minds are able to shine through the utterly black darkness of the disease, so we are able see clearly. Sadly, the second group will helplessly and hopelessly grope to find their way up to us to try to reach our level of wisdom and understanding but to no avail, for the darkness has swallowed you all -- whole! Night. Night.

Boxcar

[horses4courses]

Add another for the left.

That's what a university education did to my thinking, and I'm proud of it.

I realize that we are in the minority in this forum.

At least that is not the case in Washington right now!

(I can hear all the righties chiming in "Just wait til November!!!...blah...blah")

[DJofSD]

13 - Jesus Christ and the twelve apostles.

[Secretariat]

Spot on Most. I made the big mistake of defending our President and criticizing the right wing media here. I was surprised at the venom that was sent my way. This off topic section is VERY right wing. If 0 is moderate and 10 is extreme, the people here are about an 8 in my opinion. I've heard that Bush kept us safe for 8 years until Obama got in office. I've heard that the Dems forced :lol: Bush to sign the banking bill that caused the housing crisis. I've heard that everything is Clinton's fault, and of course the tired fear mongering association with his old pastor who he has denounced. Its funny how most people don't realize how extreme they are. The biggest problem I have with the most sensible of the right is that they believe if the government does ANYTHING to help the people of this country, its socialism. How sad really.

An excellent post. I disagree with one part though.. I'd put this board as a 10 of 10 in right wing extremist posting. It seems even further right than free Republic.

.............................................

FDR's Second Bill of Rights:

•The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

•The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

•The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

•The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

•The right of every family to a decent home;

•The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

•The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

•And finally, the right to a good education.

[toetoe]

Well, if it's only bordering on extremism, I guess it's still in the midrange ... :confused:



It's like something being very relative or very unique, or a lady being a bit pregnant, I guess.

[bigmack]

Righties.....12

PA,Tom, DJofSD, ArlJim78, Dave Schwartz, boxcar,
Leonard, BenDiesel26, BlueShoe, rastajenk, Greyfox, bigmack, johnhannibalsmith
Lefties........6

46zilzal, Robert Goren, mostpost, hcap, Space Monkey (nutcase), Secretariat

Schwartz ain't no rightie. I thought you said it was 4-1?

[bigmack]

Thats what the right wing, hate speech media is doing to this country.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

And this is just a start. Wanna see more?

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/143-4350_IMG.jpg

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/142-4261_IMG-Post-Election.jpg

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0703/brazil_bush_protest0308.jpg

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/3_29_10_17_39_04.png

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/IMG_9676.jpg

[BenDiesel26]

Each state has its own method of selecting delegates to a state ratifying convention. But that is not the same as a National Constitutional Convention.
I should not have taken the word of the article's author. But even assuming that each state be allowed to select delegates according to each state's desire, you will find that the country is a whole lot less conservative than you think.

Correct. I speak of Article 5, which I correctly alluded to in the other thread. Thanks for admitting you were wrong though, as you state yourself above. You can call it a conservative issue or whatever you want. Currently 20 states have applied for a balanced budget amendment. Various other issues have received applications as well. Virginia's bill specifically states that this would be the only issue discussed. What do you think that would do to Obama's $10 trillion CBO scored projected addition to the national debt by 2020?

[horses4courses]

For a moment there, I thought this site was plugging escort services, or chicks craving men in your area........

Naaah.......it's just that 'ole w**** Ann Coulter...... :lol: :lol:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Being a rightie must be a broad category - I have no love for the Republican party, lean towards a pro-choice position, have repeatedly been called "Godless" (or some variation thereof) by Boxcar, have never held a gun, much less owned one, and I refuse to have so much as a bank account...

I guess it is a good thing that I have a conservative view of the Constitution and the role of centralized government or I'd be a leftie... :eek:

[bigmack]

I guess it is a good thing that I have a conservative view of the Constitution and the role of centralized government or I'd be a leftie... :eek:
I thought so. hcap lost another rightie and picks up "Keep on Rockin' in the Free World" Horses4Courses" 11-7

[mostpost]

have repeatedly been called "Godless" (or some variation thereof) by Boxcar
We could have quite a club. If we can find a venue large enough to accomodate all our members.

[DJofSD]

We could have quite a club. If we can find a venue large enough to accomodate all our members.
There is a place described by Mr. Alighieri. It will hold all of you.

[Greyfox]

So far this thread alone....


Greyfox,


I'll bet you can't pick horses either. I consider myself an Independent.

[boxcar]

After a while it is pointless to continue arguing with you. If I post something from a source and you say the source is unreliable, it is pointless to go back and forth. If I define something in a certain way, and you disagree with my definitiion it is pointless to keep repeating my definition in hopes of wearing you down. And it soes not matter that my definition is widely accepted or from the dictionary or some such source.
Specifically as to your "What is my definition of Socialism?" rant. In my view Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are controlled by the group; whether that group be the government or the workers in a particular industry. You want to expand that definition to include any actions taken by the government to benefiot the citizens. i.e. Social Security, Medicare, OSHA. Doing things for the people that they cannot do well individually is not Socialism it is good government. An individual worker can't tell his boss that the assembly line is unsafe, he would be fired. The government can come in and fine the company and the assembly line will be upgraded. An elderly person can not afford to pay all their menical bills themselves. But through Medicare, which they contributed to all their working lives, these things can be taken care of.

I don't have to ask your definition of Socialism. It is any kind of government involvement in any aspect of your life. Unless your house is on fire. Or your Lamburgereenee is being stolen. Or the street in front of your castle needs repair. In other words stay out of your life unless we can help you and don't expect you to help us.

Sorry I missed this post. Didn't see it. To your credit, you actually tackled the definition (albeit as superficial as it is).

One of the core problems with socialism is that the "group", i.e. the collective didn't contribute one drop of blood, sweat or tears by assuming any risk of capital or liabilities in starting up businesses. In short, these collectives or groups have nothing invested, save the time and work they put in at the workplace.

Secondly, you talk about government doing things for the people that they cannot do for themselves very well. But this doesn't square with reality. There are people who actually pride themselves for doing things well for themselves -- for their skills in self-reliance -- for their independence. What your overly simplistic view suggests is that there are only two kinds of people in the world: Can Dos and Cannot Dos. But there's a third, as well: Will Not Dos, which you conveniently leave out of your simplistic equation! In socialism there is every built-in disincentive for individuals to grow, mature, develop and advance to the "Can Do" stage. But in addition to all this, the Will Not Dos have a moral obligation to work! They have a moral obligation to contribute to society. As that NT text essentially said in my tag line once, if a man won't work, don't let him eat! Don't feed him! Today, this kind of attitude would be mocked and ridiculed as heartless, merciless, uncaring, unloving...yada, yada, yada.

Your world view is also unrealistic because the underlying assumption is that the Can Dos are all wealthy people and the only reason they have their wealth is because they were born into it. It does not take into account that America for all these many decades has truly been the land of opportunity for all those who have truly desired to grasp it. Most people have worked very hard for their whatever money they have because the warp 'n' woof of free enterprise of the free market system is competition. But in any competitive environment, it's a given that there will be winners and losers! Not everyone will win. Not all "games" will end in equal outcomes, e.g. Commies 10, Capitalists 10. (This is why by the way competition is so often frowned upon in schools. Libs don't want kids to learn the tough lessons in life!). However, just because someone fails in his new business, for example, does not mean that he shouldn't try succeeding somewhere else. (I knew a guy once who failed four times in business and did not make it big until the fifth try! (That speaks to desire, tenacity and courage!) He's like the fighter who gets into the ring and refuses to give up.

Furthermore, as far as old people not having enough to pay their medical bills, they would if when they were younger set some money aside faithfully for anticipated needs. Also, there would be a lot more financially healthier seniors today even if they had saved their money faithfully only in banks rather than giving it to the state to fatten its General Fund coffers! (But this is whole 'nother can of worms.)

Lastly, I don't believe too many conservatives would be opposed to tax deductions being take on their income for principled and very tightly regulated redistribution purposes for the truly needy in our society. But as it has been pointed our previously somewhere else, the political motive and mechanism has become totally corrupt to where now politicians, for their own greedy, selfish purposes, are building and perpetually maintaining a voting constituency block via the old quid pro quo method, i.e. you vote for me and I promise to fight to get you this entitlement program or that one, etc. The lure of easy, fast money for voters, as well as the easy votes to be had on the other by politicians are temptations that very, very few are able to overcome. What incentives are there within the system to climb to the moral high ground by doing what is right. and good and just?

Boxcar
P.S. I don't believe I would get very upset at all if my "Lamburgereenee" were stolen, for I would not know what the heck that even was; however if I had a Lamborghini in my driveway and it went MIA, that might be a wee bit unsettling.

[bigmack]

I'll bet you can't pick horses either. I consider myself an Independent.
Ding, another loss. 10-7

7 times 4 is 10?

[boxcar]

An excellent post. I disagree with one part though.. I'd put this board as a 10 of 10 in right wing extremist posting. It seems even further right than free Republic.

.............................................

FDR's Second Bill of Rights:

•The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

•The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

•The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

•The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

•The right of every family to a decent home;

•The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

•The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

•And finally, the right to a good education.

Has any nation successfully implemented all those "rights". And if so, at what costs? FDR was quite the utopian, wasn't he? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

So far this thread alone....

Righties.....13

PA,Tom, DJofSD, ArlJim78, Dave Schwartz, boxcar,
Leonard, BenDiesel26, BlueShoe, rastajenk, Greyfox, bigmack, johnhannibalsmith


Lefties........5

46zilzal, Robert Goren, mostpost, hcap, Space Monkey


Not sure.......

PhantomOnTour

Let's see now. What side do I belong on? :confused:

What side is Boxcar on? :p :lol:

Before the gap closes with a rush please remember Newtothegame comes out later on and Isbets is probably still at the deli. And Pell Mell, Toetoe, Huskers55, CJ's Dad, JustRalph, Gary G, Lefty and Lamboguy aren't going to be buying any Obama/Biden bumper stickers any time soon.

And Elkabong deserves his own line here. :)

Of course, Eastie knows which way is up too! :ThmbUp:

(If I missed anyone it's just because I stopped looking around too soon.)

[NJ Stinks]

I'll bet you can't pick horses either. I consider myself an Independent.

I have never been sure about your position either, Greyfox. Although I must say Hcap has been around here a lot longer than I have. :p :)

[mostpost]

Schwartz ain't no rightie. I thought you said it was 4-1?
I checked out Dave Schwartz's prior posts so I could prove you wrong. He seldom posts in off topic, and if he has a political bias I could not detect it.
So you were right. I hate it when that happens. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[NJ Stinks]

And Warren Henry will be mad if not given a seat on the right as will Andy.

[ArlJim78]

How come secretariat is not on the lefty list? Is he not welcome there?

[johnhannibalsmith]

As long as we're going through the list in its entirety - I think you can seat JogNLope over there with NJStinks.

[NJ Stinks]

How come secretariat is not on the lefty list? Is he not welcome there?

Hell, I'd give up my seat for Secretariat.

[NJ Stinks]

As long as we're going through the list in its entirety - I think you can seat JogNLope over there with NJStinks.

I'm dusting that seat off as we speak. :ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

This is all so UNFAIR. The deck is truly stacked against you Lefties. Any ONE of us on the Right could take on the entire motley crew of you guys in a debate on any political subject and beat you handily. How do you propose to level this playing field? How are you going to achieve Equal Outcomes? I don't see a solution; for any of us are so good that we'd win by default, anyway, even if we didn't show up. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

I'm dusting that seat off as we speak. :ThmbUp:

Where's Tom? Surely he has something to say about a parrot only needing a perch... :D

[sandpit]

Ding, another loss. 10-7

7 times 4 is 10?

Abbott and Costello mathematics :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

You know - as crazy as it may sound - when I think of Off Topic - General I think of it kind of like the Civil War. And, ironically enough, Johnny Reb is on the left side of the aisle here.

We're still trying to cast Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jeb Stuart but we can't find anyone in Hollywood willing to play the parts. :D

[mostpost]

This is all so UNFAIR. The deck is truly stacked against you Lefties. Any ONE of us on the Right could take on the entire motley crew of you guys in a debate on any political subject and beat you handily. How do you propose to level this playing field? How are you going to achieve Equal Outcomes? I don't see a solution; for any of us are so good that we'd win by default, anyway, even if we didn't show up. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar
I am going to write a letter of protest to Merriam Webster. The have a whole definition of delusional in their dictionary and they don't have a picture of you. :confused:

[Greyfox]

Where's Tom? Surely he has something to say about a parrot only needing a perch... :D

Tom is now Habib. He heard that mandatory health care insurance won't be required of Muslims. :D

[boxcar]

I am going to write a letter of protest to Merriam Webster. The have a whole definition of delusional in their dictionary and they don't have a picture of you. :confused:

Dear Confused:

You're evidently confusing dictionaries for comic books, which in your case is readily understandable. See, for example, all the typos in your #57. :rolleyes:

Yours truly,
Boxcar

[boxcar]

Tom is now Habib. He heard that mandatory health care insurance won't be required of Muslims. :D

You know that's a nice dodge. All we conservatives should convert to Islam and become covert operatives within their dens of iniquity, while simultaneously liberating ourselves from the tyrannical clutches of government. Very :cool:

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

Tom is now Habib. He heard that mandatory health care insurance won't be required of Muslims. :D
are you sure it wasn't the 72 virgins that attracted him?

[Greyfox]

are you sure it wasn't the 72 virgins that attracted him?

Right now he'd die to meet one virgin, far less 71 more.:lol:

[toetoe]

There are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:


I forgot. Newtothegame posts here. Sorry Newt, almost left you out of the right wing wacko list. Nothing personal. ;)




I know the nature of the thread's subject lends itself to the plastering of labels more than the argument of real issues, but even allowing for that, the post quoted above is remarkable for its vacuity.


For the millionth time, Sir:

What's your point ? I expect you to slam posters by name, somehow hoping that the slamming should make your case, but proving the beliefs you cited are wrong --- well, that would take rhetorical game, and yours is at a level no higher than King Barack's, a sample of which follows. Get ready --- it's the most profound thing His Highness ever deigned to intone:

"Change ... is coming ... to America" [:Wild applause.] Pretty cool, that. Wish I'd thought of it.



You, Sir, are a healther. You probably doubt that we know the true killer of Lincoln, in which case you would be a Boother. If you believed that people receive signals from outer space through dental implants, you would be a toother. If you believe, as I suspect you do, that a country singer was kidnapped by Martians, you are a Garther. See how any fool can tar dissenters with the pith of a one-word label ?



Are you really Dylan "Whatsferdinnernot" Ratigan of MSLGBT ? Or maybe the Great Toure ?




Something the extreme borderliners share: the belief that speech is protected. I challenge, you, mostpost, to defend the twinky izquierdistas on the Canadian Human Rights Commission and in the British Government (tell me that august body is not socialistic :rolleyes: ), and your P.A. sistren, Grits and JoanieD, who think people should be jailed, banned, physicall battered, gelded, etc., for voicing unpopular opinions --- or indeed to defend anyone advocating criminal charges for speech that "violates the unwritten code of 'positive space.'" [That is taken verbatim from the Ottawa University Student Federation resolution (are any students resolved simply to study anymore ?) condemning Ann Coulter, with whom I agree on little, but --- what a concept ! --- whose inalienable right to speak I defend.]

Defend them, please. Come on, man. At least try.

[toetoe]

"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response ... Everything that is done by the government isn't Socialism.



Just who "designed" the term, if not the Bolsheviks ? Are you claiming that Sarah Palin just coined the phrase last week ? I ask again --- who "designed" the term ?

Everything written by mostpost isn't logical ... but I'm still going to parse his statements on their merits, as if they were logical assertions that made sense on purpose. See the concept ? Accountability for statements; not broad smears and piffle.

[toetoe]

I think it is perfectly clear to anyone with any sense.



Sir, Bonehead Conversation 101 teaches that the speaker is obligated to make his point clear to the listener, even if that entails repetition of said point --- even repetition using other words. Understand ?

Anyone saying, "I think it's perfectly clear to anyone with any sense" is looking for an argument about as enlightening as the following:

A: "You're a rightwing wacko."

B: "Am not."

A: "Are too."

B: "Am not."

A: "Are too. Okay, great. I'm glad that's settled."

[Tom]

Hey johnnabil, Bachman was holding a picture of Pelosi and slapping her face while the people below were spitting and calling out racial slurs at democratic congressman. Thats fact. Bachman was inciting people to violence. Thats borderline criminal.

It's not a fact just because you say it is.
Prove it.

[toetoe]

In my view Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are controlled by the group; whether that group be the government or the workers in a particular industry.



Surely you can't mean labor unions, banks, General Motors, medical care ? :eek: .



If my house is insured I might not want a fire department. Do I have a choice ?

[Tom]

An excellent post. I disagree with one part though.. I'd put this board as a 10 of 10 in right wing extremist posting. It seems even further right than free Republic.

.............................................

FDR's Second Bill of Rights:

•The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

•The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

•The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

•The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

•The right of every family to a decent home;

•The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

•The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

•And finally, the right to a good education.

Do all people in the world have these rights, Sec or just us?
If all people have them, what good are they when no one is forced to provide them to you? Are rights inherent or granted by the government? If they are granted by the government, then the government can take them away, right? And if ALL people have those right, how can it be that some people have to provide not only their own homes but someone else's as well? If t decent home is a right, then why should I have to work for it? Where do I show up to my rightful home given to me?

Here's were FDR was flat out wrong. Those are not rights - they are rewards. For hard work. A right never creates an obligation on someone else. If everyone has a right to a job, can the government force you to hire him? What if he a child molester? He still has that right? What if he is a worthless worker - can you be prevented from firing him? Are you suggesting the price of farm goods be set by the government and not the market? Can we today sue the dems for failing to provide a good education?

Good post, Sec - are you prepared to discuss it, or were you just told to post and run?:lol:

How come no on has ever tried to come up with a Bill of Responsibilities?

Anyone up to the task?

[bigmack]

T - Get a load of Schultz today -

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdkU8z4zvk

It's true - He knows nothing

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XM-OgI8GaeU/SYsScJIrVuI/AAAAAAAACaI/2jhvs_bjvC4/s320/user-SgtSchultz19.jpg

[maiom01]

left, right...who cares....pick winners, make money and learn from your mistakes!!!!

[BlueShoe]

Just thought of a missing lefty, Ddog. What happened to Doggy, did someone run him off? He hasnt posted in months. Wasnt he the one that liked to post the words to the Internationale, the communist anthem? It would seem that when you add them up, there are only slightly fewer on the left than on the right. So much for the supposed overwhelming number of conservatives. We just present our comments more forcefully and in a much more logical manner, therefore our numbers would appear larger.

[newtothegame]

There are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. There are those who think Medicare and Social Security is Socialism posting here. There are those who think a public education is Socialism posting here. There are those who think the entire continent of Europe is Socialist posting here. There are those who think health insurance is a privilege posting here. Tom posts here. Boxcar posts here. DJof SD posts here. lsbets posts here.
BigMack posts here. ArlJim78 posts here. Andymays posts here. Warren Henry posts here. BenDiesel posts here. Now, look me in the eye and tell me this forum isn't dominated by the far right. The only thing they don't dominate in is accuracy. :lol:


I forgot. Newtothegame posts here. Sorry Newt, almost left you out of the right wing wacko list. Nothing personal. ;)

Appreciate ya not forgetting me...i was starting to feel under appreciated lol :lol:

[Valuist]

Add me to the right.

[ElKabong]

And Elkabong deserves his own line here. :)


(If I missed anyone it's just because I stopped looking around too soon.)

A registered Independant, hoss. Definitely conservative, but I don't carry any party's water.

[ElKabong]

TVG?

I'm stunned that network hasn't made the big time. After watching two people swap gum on air, I just knew that thing was gonna zoom in the ratings. I was wrong :sleeping:

Who knew!?

[ArlJim78]

Maybe Prospector will weigh in, although I think his leanings are pretty clear.

[NJ Stinks]

Here's were FDR was flat out wrong. Those are not rights - they are rewards. For hard work. A right never creates an obligation on someone else. If everyone has a right to a job, can the government force you to hire him? What if he a child molester? He still has that right? What if he is a worthless worker - can you be prevented from firing him? Are you suggesting the price of farm goods be set by the government and not the market? Can we today sue the dems for failing to provide a good education?



FDR lived in a time when people weren't assumed to be lazy riffraff if they couldn't find a decent job.

FDR believed if you do work hard this is what you deserve. That is - a government that protects jobs from being exported; jobs that paid enough to live decently; and a government that protects people and companies from monopolies that distort wealth and crush competition. What have we got today? Monopolies created by mergers that never should been allowed; jobs that are long gone abroad in the name of cheap labor and profits for a few; people working a lot for a little in many cases.

I can only imagine what FDR would think about a company like Wal-mart. :rolleyes:

In short, you are flat out wrong IMO.

[Rookies]

A more accurate way to describe off topic is that most of those who post here from the right espouse an extreme right view. And a majority, though not all, of those who post here are from the right.



On the topic of the thread, Mostie's post is close to my own opinion of Off Topic. Since I've joined, there has been a continuous majority of right wing voices, banging away EVERY day on a variety of topics. The viciousness of some responses and the calling out of any mildly liberal idea as a mere domino theory away from communist insurrection bespeaks a fundamental lack of successful left wing political campaigns/ knowledge of said in American society.

There is, to my knowledge, not one of the world's democracies that has not elected a national/ state government of the left wing persuasion ( from Social Democratic- Democratic Socialist- Socialist) OTHER than the United States. Of course, many of the ideas espoused by the left in those countries (e.g. Public Education, Medicare, Maternity Benefits, Nationalization/ State ownership of some industries, Subsidized Higher Education and Tax Redistribution Schemes (aka Progressive Tax) are all old hat and rather staid. In America, dominated by right wing or center-right governments for so many decades, these are deemed to be extreme ideas and believed to be the end of American civilization.

On the topic, a few cons here do argue with calmness, civility and reason, but there is a larger group who can rarely get through a thread without vicious invective and name calling. I must admit that even the most hardline Con (like Boxcar) occasionally surprise me with a reasoned, almost cogent argument (that I naturally disagree with ;) ), but normally it is the shouting and gnashing of teeth that dominates.

IMHO, anyway.

[boxcar]

Do all people in the world have these rights, Sec or just us?
If all people have them, what good are they when no one is forced to provide them to you? Are rights inherent or granted by the government? If they are granted by the government, then the government can take them away, right? And if ALL people have those right, how can it be that some people have to provide not only their own homes but someone else's as well? If t decent home is a right, then why should I have to work for it? Where do I show up to my rightful home given to me?

Here's were FDR was flat out wrong. Those are not rights - they are rewards. For hard work. A right never creates an obligation on someone else. If everyone has a right to a job, can the government force you to hire him? What if he a child molester? He still has that right? What if he is a worthless worker - can you be prevented from firing him? Are you suggesting the price of farm goods be set by the government and not the market? Can we today sue the dems for failing to provide a good education?

Good post, Sec - are you prepared to discuss it, or were you just told to post and run?:lol:

How come no on has ever tried to come up with a Bill of Responsibilities?

Anyone up to the task? (emphasis mine)

Good post, Tom! Nor does a right ever infringe upon another person's right! Never! Someone's supposed right to health coverage should not infringe upon my right of personal property ownership or my GOD-GIVEN right to protect my personal property from theft. Also, the more a Taker (through the proxy of government ) steals from me (the Giver), the more he infringes, again, upon my GOD-GIVEN right to pursue life, liberty and happiness; for money is highly instrumental in helping me to fully appropriate that right to the fullest extent of my ability. Why should I be penalized or punished so that someone else can realize his man-made, artificial, phony, trumped up right!? Why should one person be rewarded his right at the expense of any of mine!? What makes the Taker inherently "more equal" to me?

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

Sorry I missed listing you with us, Rookies. :blush: God knows you've taken more than your share of garbage because you happen to live in Canada.

If I haven't said it lately, I love everything about Canada. Except the takeout, of course. :)

[newtothegame]

Yep...no denying it here....I am definitely on the consetrvative side of the aisle...so chalk me to the right side!!!

[Rookies]

Yep...no denying it here....I am definitely on the consetrvative side of the aisle...so chalk me to the right side!!!

A more interesting analysis here would be to list say the Top 10 societal issues, see where people stand regardless of left-right beliefs and include the reasons why they do so.

Some would "vote the straight party line", but others (like myself) have more hardline left wing AND right wing views depending on this issue.

[46zilzal]

Add another for the left.

That's what a university education did to my thinking, and I'm proud of it.

I realize that we are in the minority in this forum.

good for you.

[BombsAway Bob]

Notice the first person who set the "Pace Advantage" record straight...
(at least about the censoring part...)
. http://community.tvg.com/t5/The-Lounge/Any-one-use-Pace-advantage-site/td-p/137837

[BlueShoe]

This thread has gone into 10 pages, perhaps we should stop and do a recount, since several more have spoken up. Whos right, whos left, whos moderate, who doesnt know, who plays for both sides, who doesnt care, etc.

[46zilzal]

This thread has gone into 10 pages, perhaps we should stop and do a recount, since several more have spoken up. Whos right, whos left, whos moderate, who doesnt know, who plays for both sides, who doesnt care, etc.
Better yet, what does it matter? A label will not change a point of view.

[mostpost]

Yep...no denying it here....I am definitely on the consetrvative side of the aisle...so chalk me to the right side!!!
In this case the right side is not the correct side. :lol: :lol:

[newtothegame]

A more interesting analysis here would be to list say the Top 10 societal issues, see where people stand regardless of left-right beliefs and include the reasons why they do so.

Some would "vote the straight party line", but others (like myself) have more hardline left wing AND right wing views depending on this issue.

I think it would depend on the questions. The 'top ten societal issues" ( from whos perspective). Do you understand what i am saying?? You can make anyone look further left or right then they truly are based on those questions!

[mostpost]

Before Boxcar accuses me of not responding to Toetoe, I don't know what he's talking about. And the more he writes, the less I understand. :confused:

[BlueShoe]

Hey Zilly, you didnt tell us who Norris is. A couple of us made educated guesses. Now we are curious. Are you going to let the cat out of the bag, or just keep Norris in your deepest, darkest corner of childhood memories?

[mostpost]

Surely you can't mean labor unions, banks, General Motors, medical care ? :eek: .



If my house is insured I might not want a fire department. Do I have a choice ?
A fire doesn't just destroy property. When you're trapped in that upstairs bedroom, just call your insurance agent. And you say I'm not logical

[46zilzal]

Hey Zilly, you didnt tell us who Norris is. A couple of us made educated guesses. Now we are curious. Are you going to let the cat out of the bag, or just keep Norris in your deepest, darkest corner of childhood memories?
Friend of my parents when I was growing up, an uneducated racist who set the stage, along with hundreds of others from the home of the John Birch Society, for my earliest dislike for the ultraconservative, especially one as dumb as he was. Always knocked higher education as if he had actually ever set foot inside an institution of higher learning.

I nearly punched his lights out when I was a sophomore as he was verbally abusive to my father, A REAL ESTABLISHED EXPERT on the United States Cavalry and most things historical about the Army. I took him aside and related that fact that he needed to be more respectful when he was in the presence of a true expert.....I withheld doing more than that out of respect for my parents.

Ashamed too, was that his wife was one of the nicest, kindest women I ever met and he embarrassed her with his ramblings often.

In summary, he was an excellent case of a bad example.

[newtothegame]

A fire doesn't just destroy property. When you're trapped in that upstairs bedroom, just call your insurance agent. And you say I'm not logical

For every action, there is a re-action....

You can and will reply to anything that fits your agenda...but as Box said earlier...thats not "normal" thinking. If someone is in a bedroom trapped....(whats the average time to respond??)....
This is not a persons thought when they buy insurance...their thought is about "property loss"...
I was hoping even you could see that much...guess I was wrong again as you like to say :) :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

Before Boxcar accuses me of not responding to Toetoe, I don't know what he's talking about. And the more he writes, the less I understand. :confused:

I wanted to take a stab at responding myself but the form and content were beyond mortal man.

[newtothegame]

Friend of my parents when I was growing up, an uneducated racist who set the stage, along with hundreds of others from the home of the John Birch Society, for my earliest dislike for the ultraconservative, especially one as dumb as he was. Always knocked higher education as if he had actually ever set foot inside an institution of higher learning.

I nearly punched his lights out when I was a sophomore as he was verbally abusive to my father, A REAL ESTABLISHED EXPERT on the United States Cavalry and most things historical about the Army. I took him aside and related that fact that he needed to be more respectful when he was in the presence of a true expert.....I withheld doing more than that out of respect for my parents.

Ashamed too, was that his wife was one of the nicest, kindest women I ever met and he embarrassed her with his ramblings often.

In summary, he was an excellent case of a bad example.

You say your father " A real established Expert"......
You talk about yourself as the best informed on the planet in most areas such as DR's...
But they hung around with "Uneducated racist""??????
Is this another case of wanting to feel good about yourself???
Is this another showing your belief in being above others???
I guess you have first hand knowledge of his wifes embarrassment???
She told ya ll of this behind her husbands back right????
Good thing you were there to save her world from total devastation!!!!

[NJ Stinks]

You say your father " A real established Expert"......
You talk about yourself as the best informed on the planet in most areas such as DR's...
But they hung around with "Uneducated racist""??????
Is this another case of wanting to feel good about yourself???
Is this another showing your belief in being above others???
I guess you have first hand knowledge of his wifes embarrassment???
She told ya ll of this behind her husbands back right????
Good thing you were there to save her world from total devastation!!!!

No doubt 46zilzal had good reason not to answer the question.

[46zilzal]

You say your father " A real established Expert"......
..
But they hung around with "Uneducated racist""??????
Is this another case of wanting to feel good about yourself???

I am positive the only thing that cemented their relationship was that my mother and this lady were from the same home town.....and not too long after the verbal attack on my dad, the visits there dropped off to nothing.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I wanted to take a stab at responding myself but the form and content were beyond mortal man.

Well the good news is, you will be in receipt of the promise of immortality at the next election in exchange for dutiful party loyalty. :kiss:

[boxcar]

No doubt 46zilzal had good reason not to answer the question.

Which "one"? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

Well the good news is, you will be in receipt of the promise of immortality at the next election in exchange for dutiful party loyalty. :kiss:

John, if you read the post in question, you know that for once I'm not following the party line here. :cool:

[BlueShoe]

Friend of my parents when I was growing up, an uneducated racist who set the stage, along with hundreds of others from the home of the John Birch Society, for my earliest dislike for the ultraconservative, especially one as dumb as he was.
Ah, I see, the stereotypical Good ole Boy, ignorant cracker. If this man was such a dolt, puzzling as to why your parents would maintain a friendship with him. For some reason, you seem to have a fear and obsession with the JBS. Unwarrented, I have known a few Birchers, and they are nothing like their enemies portray them as. They classify themselves as an educational organization, and are quite sedate, almost too much so in my opinion. Too bad that you never had any dialog with conservative intellectuals. An hour spent with someone like William F. Buckley could have been enlightening.

[mostpost]

For every action, there is a re-action....

You can and will reply to anything that fits your agenda...but as Box said earlier...thats not "normal" thinking. If someone is in a bedroom trapped....(whats the average time to respond??)....
This is not a persons thought when they buy insurance...their thought is about "property loss"...
I was hoping even you could see that much...guess I was wrong again as you like to say :) :lol:
Toetoe said that since he has insurance, what does he need a fire department for. I pointed out that he might need it to save his life. Or the lives of his family. It had nothing to do with whether he should buy insurance and everything to do with whether he should opt out of being served by his local fire department. Not that he could do so, since we also must consider the safety of the neighboring homes and their occupants.

[newtothegame]

Toetoe said that since he has insurance, what does he need a fire department for. I pointed out that he might need it to save his life. Or the lives of his family. It had nothing to do with whether he should buy insurance and everything to do with whether he should opt out of being served by his local fire department. Not that he could do so, since we also must consider the safety of the neighboring homes and their occupants.

HUH???????? so what your saying is that you went and asked your potential neighbors if they had fire insurance before you purchased or they asked you the same question before they bought next to you????

LMAO...thats got to be the funniest thing I have read here in a while lol

[Robert Goren]

Ah, I see, the stereotypical Good ole Boy, ignorant cracker. If this man was such a dolt, puzzling as to why your parents would maintain a friendship with him. For some reason, you seem to have a fear and obsession with the JBS. Unwarrented, I have known a few Birchers, and they are nothing like their enemies portray them as. They classify themselves as an educational organization, and are quite sedate, almost too much so in my opinion. Too bad that you never had any dialog with conservative intellectuals. An hour spent with someone like William F. Buckley could have been enlightening.I spent several hours listening Buckley live and belonged to a group (YAF) he founded. I also attended several JBS meetings when I was in college. I never got idea that they were on the same page. Buckley never went for that great conspiracy theory of the JBS. Sometime if you are really unlucky, you might stumble on one of my rambling posts about attending the JBS meetings.

[boxcar]

A more accurate way to describe off topic is that most of those who post here from the right espouse an extreme right view. And a majority, though not all, of those who post here are from the right.



On the topic of the thread, Mostie's post is close to my own opinion of Off Topic. Since I've joined, there has been a continuous majority of right wing voices, banging away EVERY day on a variety of topics. The viciousness of some responses and the calling out of any mildly liberal idea as a mere domino theory away from communist insurrection bespeaks a fundamental lack of successful left wing political campaigns/ knowledge of said in American society.

There is, to my knowledge, not one of the world's democracies that has not elected a national/ state government of the left wing persuasion ( from Social Democratic- Democratic Socialist- Socialist) OTHER than the United States. Of course, many of the ideas espoused by the left in those countries (e.g. Public Education, Medicare, Maternity Benefits, Nationalization/ State ownership of some industries, Subsidized Higher Education and Tax Redistribution Schemes (aka Progressive Tax) are all old hat and rather staid. In America, dominated by right wing or center-right governments for so many decades, these are deemed to be extreme ideas and believed to be the end of American civilization.

On the topic, a few cons here do argue with calmness, civility and reason, but there is a larger group who can rarely get through a thread without vicious invective and name calling. I must admit that even the most hardline Con (like Boxcar) occasionally surprise me with a reasoned, almost cogent argument (that I naturally disagree with ;) ), but normally it is the shouting and gnashing of teeth that dominates.

IMHO, anyway.

"Almost cogent argument", eh? :rolleyes: Even if it were true, it beats anything the radical lefties post. And by the way, I'm just slightly to the right of center, at least that's where my chair is right now relative to my desk. :D

Your take on where the world is currently is right on the mark, unfortunately. I have written about this in the recent past when categorizing the few major types of world governments. I concluded that most governments are essentially at their core oligarchies, albeit one of the "socialist" types. Sadly, I do believe (for several reasons) that the U.S. is already caught in this socialist riptide, and that's it's inevitable we will be swept along and America will fulfill its inevitable global destiny in the world by becoming just another mediocre, also-ran nation of the world. Once the last Champion of Freedom and Exceptionalism is removed from the world's stage, there will not be so much as one obstacle to stand in the way of the ushering in of the "new world order" or "one world government". I say all this due to what the current political-economic climate is globally and even more importantly by what I have deduced from all the end times prophecies in the bible. Some time back I stumbled on to this rather interesting and eerily prophetic paragraph on the web:

Like capitalism, socialism must be international so that global resources can be shared. No country can be truly independent of the global economy because until capitalism is defeated internationally it will continue to sabotage efforts to build socialism. Achieving socialism in the United States, the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, is necessary to any country being able to determine its own destiny.

In other words, the last piece that must fall into place is the U.S., in order for Socialism to "succeed" on a global basis. Virtually all the nations in the world are patiently waiting for the U.S. to climb aboard their sinking ship of Socialism. The world is waiting for someone (like BO,for example) to bring the U.S. down to its level and become a team player. (Of course, the world thinks that Socialism on a universal scale will be the ultimate solution to the world's economic and political problems. Socialism is going to save the world, so all the self-deceived world leaders will believe. (Talk about the blind leading the blind!)

Here's the rest of the article.

http://www.redletterpress.org/socialism101.html

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

HUH???????? so what your saying is that you went and asked your potential neighbors if they had fire insurance before you purchased or they asked you the same question before they bought next to you????

LMAO...thats got to be the funniest thing I have read here in a while lol

I think Mostpost is going to yearn for toetoe... :D

[bigmack]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/right_foot.jpg
boxcar newtothegame BlueShoe ArlJim78 ElKabong Valuist macklicious Tommy BenDiesel26 PaceAdvantage

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/left_foot.jpg
Robert Goren, mostpost, NJ Stinks 46zilzal Rookies horses4courses Secretariat hccap Space Monkey (this goof should count for 3)



http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/Switzerland_flag.gif
johnhannibalsmith 2toes Greyfox PhantomOnTour rastajenk DJofSD Dave Schwartz

Ya better have a pretty good case to take any of those outta Switzerland.

Carry On....

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/thethrowupmongrels.gif

[NJ Stinks]

"

Your take on where the world is currently is right on the mark, unfortunately. I have written about this in the recent past when categorizing the few major types of world governments. I concluded that most governments are essentially at their core oligarchies, albeit one of the "socialist" types. Sadly, I do believe (for several reasons) that the U.S. is already caught in this socialist riptide, and that's it's inevitable we will be swept along and America will fulfill its inevitable global destiny in the world by becoming just another mediocre, also-ran nation of the world. Once the last Champion of Freedom and Exceptionalism is removed from the world's stage, there will not be so much as one obstacle to stand in the way of the ushering in of the "new world order" or "one world government". I say all this due to what the current political-economic climate is globally and even more importantly by what I have deduced from all the end times prophecies in the bible. Some time back I stumbled on to this rather interesting and eerily prophetic paragraph on the web:

Like capitalism, socialism must be international so that global resources can be shared. No country can be truly independent of the global economy because until capitalism is defeated internationally it will continue to sabotage efforts to build socialism. Achieving socialism in the United States, the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, is necessary to any country being able to determine its own destiny.

In other words, the last piece that must fall into place is the U.S., in order for Socialism to "succeed" on a global basis. Virtually all the nations in the world are patiently waiting for the U.S. to climb aboard their sinking ship of Socialism. The world is waiting for someone (like BO,for example) to bring the U.S. down to its level and become a team player. (Of course, the world thinks that Socialism on a universal scale will be the ultimate solution to the world's economic and political problems. Socialism is going to save the world, so all the self-deceived world leaders will believe. (Talk about the blind leading the blind!)

Here's the rest of the article.

http://www.redletterpress.org/socialism101.html

Boxcar

All this because we decided that healthcare should be available to as many Americans as possible. :rolleyes:

Here's a question for you, Boxcar. Is the glass ever half full?

[GaryG]

Providing healthcare for all is just an excuse for a massive govt takeover of a large percentage of the economy. It will take generations to repair the damage done by this socialist admin.

[Tom]

Let's not forget one our founding righties....Lefty! ;)

And do we count all the lefties who were so low rent that they were banned, some multiple times :D

[rastajenk]

Fun thread...I can almost hear Pete Seeger singin' "Which side are you on, boys, which side are you on?"

[lamboguy]

one thing for sure, the politics on this board brings out some pretty passionate post's.

the more i see all these post's from both sides the more i realise how both sides are really the same, saying the same things from both sides of their mouths.

[Tom]

It just occurred to me that if you are a half-wit and face off one on with someone, you are already outnumbered! :lol:
Not that that happens here.
All our guys are full of wit.

[GaryG]

The two who most influenced my political philosophy were Buckley and Goldwater. I had "Conscience of a Conservative" until I loaned it out 10 years ago and never got it back. It was ghost written by Buckley's brother-in-law. There are some educated, well read conservatives in this world, some even speak with an Appalachian twang. There are also liberals who see the world through some special kind of glasses. Examples right here on PA.

[Greyfox]

Let's not forget one our founding righties....Lefty! ;)

:D

Yes Lefty is righty and Isbets.

[Leonard]

Has any nation successfully implemented all those "rights". And if so, at what costs? FDR was quite the utopian, wasn't he? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

FDR's "2nd Bill of Rights" very closely mirrors the "rights" found in the old Soviet Union constitution. Most likely that is where he came up with the ideas.

I don't think it turned out so well for them.

[ArlJim78]

FDR had The New Deal

Truman had The Fair Deal

Obama has The Big F*cking deal (according to slow Joe that is)

[Leonard]

FDR had The New Deal

Truman had The Fair Deal

Obama has The Big F*cking deal (according to slow Joe that is)

:lol:

[mostpost]

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtothegame
HUH???????? so what your saying is that you went and asked your potential neighbors if they had fire insurance before you purchased or they asked you the same question before they bought next to you????

LMAO...thats got to be the funniest thing I have read here in a while lol

I think Mostpost is going to yearn for toetoe...
I don't lnow how Newt got the above out of what I posted. :confused: I'm going to try one more time. Wish me luck.

[johnhannibalsmith]

FDR had The New Deal

Truman had The Fair Deal

Obama has The Big F*cking deal (according to slow Joe that is)

This is pretty good stuff right here. :D

I can't wait until the History Channel does its retrospective look at "The Big F'n Deal"...

[DJofSD]

Na, that'd be on A&E.

[mostpost]

Let's not forget one our founding righties....Lefty! ;)

And do we count all the lefties who were so low rent that they were banned, some multiple times :D
It occurs to me that I haven't seen anything from Lefty in quite some time. I really hope his and/or his wife's health issues have not worsened.

[boxcar]

All this because we decided that healthcare should be available to as many Americans as possible. :rolleyes:

Here's a question for you, Boxcar. Is the glass ever half full?

Apart from getting into all the nuts and bolts and nuances to the several types of socialism in the world today, there are a few common denominators to all of them. One of the biggies is socialized medicine. Another biggie is wealth redistribution. All the forms to some degree subscribe to the Marxist creed that has often been stated on this forum. Get your head out of the sand for once in your life, lest people start thinking your glass has always been empty!

Even Al Sharpton in an extremely rare moment of honesty said recently that Americans should have known that when they voted for BO, they voted for Socialism.

Ed Schultz on a recent radio show, essentially asked the question that went along these lines. So, if Obama is a socialist that is a bad thing?

And numerous people on the Left, the most recent being Howard Dean, have become more emboldened to talk about the "mal-distribution" of wealth in this country, the redistribution of it, etc. -- even though your pal Mosty is in utter denial of this because he thinks such talk is divisive. And he's correct! But that talk and divisiveness emanate from the Left -- not from the Right as he thinks!

Boxcar

[boxcar]

FDR had The New Deal

Truman had The Fair Deal

Obama has The Big F*cking deal (according to slow Joe that is)

Actually, overall BO is giving us the Raw Deal!

Boxcar

[mostpost]

There is a place described by Mr. Alighieri. It will hold all of you.
For those of you without a classical literature background, DJofSD just told the lefties here to "Go to Hell" :eek:

[ArlJim78]

This is pretty good stuff right here. :D

I can't wait until the History Channel does its retrospective look at "The Big F'n Deal"...
I thought so too, it came from somebody else, I'm just passing it on because I think it will stick

[boxcar]

I don't lnow how Newt got the above out of what I posted. :confused: I'm going to try one more time. Wish me luck.

Even Lady Luck, I believe, has given up on you. And we need divine intervention to protect our intelligence from your all out assaults.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

HUH???????? so what your saying is that you went and asked your potential neighbors if they had fire insurance before you purchased or they asked you the same question before they bought next to you????

LMAO...thats got to be the funniest thing I have read here in a while lol
One more time. Toetoe said: If my house is insured I might not want a fire department. Do I have a choice ?
I interpreted that statement as saying, "It doesn't matter if my (toetoe's) house burns down, I'll just collect the insurance and rebuild." The implication being that Toetoe would choose not to be served by the local fire department if he had the power to make that choice.
My response was that would be a really dumb choice for two reasons. First, if there is a fire there is also a danger of personal injury or death. The fire department could help avoid that. Second. it is not just a matter of YOUR house burning to the ground and then being rebuilt. There is a definite danger of the fire spreading to the house next door and beyond.
I could live next door to someone whose house was uninsured, (although I would consider him a fool) but I could not live nest door to someone who refused to be served by the fire department.

[delayjf]

here are birthers posting here. There are those who believe Obama is a Muslim posting here.
Not sure if you were around when the 9/11 truthers were prominent. Many here accused President Bush of collusion with the Saudis to start the Iraq war all for the purpose of raising the price of oil and making billions.

There are those who think Obama is going to take their guns posting here. Given the gun laws in Chicago, I believe he would if he thought he could get away with it,

[bigmack]

Yes Lefty is righty and Isbets.
Neither has participated in this thread. Thus, dispelling yet another myth of hcap and the masked member PA found that incorrectly assumed this joint is exponentially riddled with righties.

[BlueShoe]

I spent several hours listening Buckley live and belonged to a group (YAF) he founded. I also attended several JBS meetings when I was in college. I never got idea that they were on the same page. Buckley never went for that great conspiracy theory of the JBS. Sometime if you are really unlucky, you might stumble on one of my rambling posts about attending the JBS meetings.
You seem to have made a rather left turn. From the Young Americans for Freedom, Buckley, and Robert Welch, to your present ideology is quite a shift. There was a bit of animosity between the JBS and WFB. Buckley viewed Birchers with distaste, and they considerd him to be the house conservative for what they called the conspiracy. Buckley was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), in JBS doctrine the arch evil enemy. Do not recall seeing your comments on the JBS, perhaps they were long ago, before I joined this forum, or I just missed them. I too attended a few JBS meetings in the 70's. I never joined, since I did have disagreements with them, but must admit that I was somewhat influenced by them.

[46zilzal]

In a nutshell the Birchers :Always looking for those Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy REDS, but never discovering a thing except P-A-R-A-N-O-I-A.

[Robert Goren]

I never was a JBSer. I attend their meetings as poor starving college student in the 60s for the free food. I was not not the only one there doing that. It is some what a turn from YAF in the 60s and 70s to where I am now, but not as much as you might think. Did you belong to YAF?

[46zilzal]

I was too busy being a part time furniture mover and a full time student to have a single moment to join a thing.

Up at 7:00, off to the biomedical library to turn the temperature down to 55 degrees (to keep others away from the ancient journals in the basement, and the cool to keep me awake) and then back and forth to class until the library closed at midnight, reviewed at home until 1:00 and then all over again the next day.

[newtothegame]

One more time. Toetoe said:
I interpreted that statement as saying, "It doesn't matter if my (toetoe's) house burns down, I'll just collect the insurance and rebuild." The implication being that Toetoe would choose not to be served by the local fire department if he had the power to make that choice.
My response was that would be a really dumb choice for two reasons. First, if there is a fire there is also a danger of personal injury or death. The fire department could help avoid that. Second. it is not just a matter of YOUR house burning to the ground and then being rebuilt. There is a definite danger of the fire spreading to the house next door and beyond.
I could live next door to someone whose house was uninsured, (although I would consider him a fool) but I could not live nest door to someone who refused to be served by the fire department.

Ok...ok...you attempt to say "your gonna try one more time with me....." ...insinuating somehow thatIi don't get it. Yet you posted it again...."I could not live nest (supposed to be next) door to someone who refused to be served by the fire department".

Mosty...this is what you libs don't get now...never have gotten...and will never get. Consertvatives , like myself, really could care less what YOU do with YOUR life. I could care less what you believe. I do NOT try to infringe upon YOUR life and I certainly do not want YOU infringing upon mine because YOU think YOU know whats best for ME.

Now back to the above post.....how would you even know if your neighbor would or wouldn't refuse to allow the fire department to serve him??? Seems to me that you need to worry about whats going on in YOUR household versus SOMEONES elses. Do you pass surveys out before yopu move into a neighborhood asking whateveryone will and wont do and decide your next course of action based on those decisions of others???
I would hate to see the day that YOU or your ilk come knocking on my door and start asking me questions " ummm sir,,....would you allow the fire department to serve your house in case of a fire?? I am asking this so I can make a decison on whether or not to move next to you"....
I can only tell you that it would not be the most pleasant conversation you ever had.
YOU and YOUR kind think you know whats best for everyone.....I wish you would of had this same mentality when you were WASTING all those millions in tax payer dollars at the post office. You obviously didnt think of others when you and your comrades were wasting those tax dollars that werent YOURS to waste.
Sad part is, your probably a nice...(just misguided IMHO) guy.

[bigmack]

In a nutshell the Birchers :Always looking for those Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy REDS, but never discovering a thing except P-A-R-A-N-O-I-A.
I for one am darn glad that false accusations and P-A-R-A-N-O-I-A are exclusive to groups from the right.

http://www.thehotjoints.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/9-11_truther.jpg

[Robert Goren]

I was too busy being a part time furniture mover and a full time student to have a single moment to join a thing.

Up at 7:00, off to the biomedical library to turn the temperature down to 55 degrees (to keep others away from the ancient journals in the basement, and the cool to keep me awake) and then back and forth to class until the library closed at midnight, reviewed at home until 1:00 and then all over again the next day.You are no doubt better off for that than I am for my poorly spent college days. I spent 3 years jumping from major to the next and a 4th jumping one bar to the next until UNL gave me the boot.

[46zilzal]

You are no doubt better off for that than I am for my poorly spent college days. I spent 3 years jumping from major to the next and a 4th jumping one bar to the next until UNL gave me the boot.
Being married will do that to your studying skills.

[Greyfox]

Random thoughts.

1. If I have no fire insurance, that's one hell of a risk to take.
2. If I have no insurance, I'd be stupid not to let a fire department put out the fire if the house was burning.
3. If I live where there is no fire department, then my insurance will sky rocket.
4. If I have insurance and don't want the fire department to put out a fire,
good luck. It would be obstructionist to try and stop them and could jeopardize any chance of collecting insurance.

I have to agree with Mosty that anyone who owns a house without fire insurance is a fool (unless they live in a tropical rain forest.);) It seems to me that my mortgage company used to insist that I have insurance in order to be financed.

[johnhannibalsmith]

And yet, the whole time I thought Mostpost's only point was that the original poster was ignoring the benefits of a Fire Department to an individual that could not be provided by insurance - perhaps the most important benefits, like continuing to exist.

[Greyfox]

And yet, the whole time I thought Mostpost's only point was that the original poster was ignoring the benefits of a Fire Department to an individual that could not be provided by insurance - perhaps the most important benefits, like continuing to exist.

Mosty has made a lot of points. I was addressing the one where he said:

"I could live next door to someone whose house was uninsured, (although I would consider him a fool)"

On that we agree.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Mosty has made a lot of points...

Let's not get carried away... He's tried to.... :D

[newtothegame]

Random thoughts.

1. If I have no fire insurance, that's one hell of a risk to take.
2. If I have no insurance, I'd be stupid not to let a fire department put out the fire if the house was burning.
3. If I live where there is no fire department, then my insurance will sky rocket.
4. If I have insurance and don't want the fire department to put out a fire,
good luck. It would be obstructionist to try and stop them and could jeopardize any chance of collecting insurance.

I have to agree with Mosty that anyone who owns a house without fire insurance is a fool (unless they live in a tropical rain forest.);) It seems to me that my mortgage company used to insist that I have insurance in order to be financed.

No one ever said mosty was wrong in saying the neighbor would be a fool..
What I said was that its NOT mosty's decision to make. Most wouldnt even know what the neghbor thought or didnt think unless he was being somewhere he shouldnt of been (which is in the neighbors business).
Now I know he will attempt to say the (neighbor volunteered this info)...but thats highly unlikely considering in the scenario given he is just moving into the neighborhood.

[Greyfox]

What I said was that its NOT mosty's decision to make. .

I never said that you didn't say that. (double negative.)
I agree. It's not his decision. I doubt that he (or anyone else) would poll the neighbours to find out before he moved in.

[BlueShoe]

Did you belong to YAF?
No. While I admired their efforts to counter the crazies of the left, socially they were a bit above me, mostly coming from upper middle or upper class backgrounds. Put bluntly, a bit too elitest for my tastes and background.

[46zilzal]

Never heard of YAF,,,we had some nutbars from the Thomas Jefferson club or following or what have you.

[newtothegame]

I never said that you didn't say that. (double negative.)
I agree. It's not his decision. I doubt that he (or anyone else) would poll the neighbours to find out before he moved in.

Mosty said "I could not live next to someone who refused....."

How would he know if they refused??????
And again...its NOT HIS CHOICE...thats the whole arguement in a nut shell...
its a lib point of view to impose his beliefs on someone else...and its what cons like me are totally against. Only I, can chose whats best for me and my family...not mosty!!!! Even if we agree on somethings, its not HIS choice whats right for ME.

[Greyfox]

Newt...believe it or not I think we got your point the first time you made it, before I ever posted.
I also agreed with it. You're starting to sound like a stuck record.

[newtothegame]

Newt...believe it or not I think we got your point the first time you made it, before I ever posted.
I also agreed with it. You're starting to sound like a stuck record.

Well you may get it....but I want him to be sure to get it. If I have to listen to "Its Bush's fault all the time for every problem, then they are gonna hear me all the time about infringing on my rights!!!

[mostpost]

And yet, the whole time I thought Mostpost's only point was that the original poster was ignoring the benefits of a Fire Department to an individual that could not be provided by insurance - perhaps the most important benefits, like continuing to exist.
You said it better than I did. I kind of got off on a tangent.
In my reply to Newt I should have said I would not want to live next to someone who refused to be served by a fire department, rather than I could not.
The point is moot because who would refuse to be served by the fire department. :confused: :confused:

[PaceAdvantage]

Is it me, or did Mack get his feet wrong in that earlier reply?

[delayjf]

•The right of every family to a decent home;

This one alone about put us under

[Rookies]

Is it me, or did Mack get his feet wrong in that earlier reply?

He had 2 the same. I know that. ONE PA World Order!:lol:

[Greyfox]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/right_foot.jpg
boxcar newtothegame BlueShoe ArlJim78 ElKabong Valuist macklicious Tommy BenDiesel26 PaceAdvantage

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/left_foot.jpg
Robert Goren, mostpost, NJ Stinks 46zilzal Rookies horses4courses Secretariat hccap Space Monkey (this goof should count for 3)



http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/Switzerland_flag.gif
johnhannibalsmith 2toes Greyfox PhantomOnTour rastajenk DJofSD Dave Schwartz

Ya better have a pretty good case to take any of those outta Switzerland.

Carry On....

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/thethrowupmongrels.gif

PA - Those are footprints. They look correct to me.

[PaceAdvantage]

yeah, the top one is a lefty and the next one is a righty foot...kind of opposite of what it should be, no?

Correcting myself here...I was looking at those footprints as if I was looking at the BOTTOM of the foot...I make things so unnecessarily complicated at times... :lol:

[bigmack]

Correcting myself here...I was looking at those footprints as if I was looking at the BOTTOM of the foot...I make things so unnecessarily complicated at times... :lol:
I had to double take @ 'em as well. Think of them as a footprint appears in sand rather than feet staring at a podiatrist. (Didn't you once declare yourself a non-starter on feet?)

For the longest spell you were hard to read politically but of late you're out. A daily espresso shot of M.Levin has had its effect. Will you be on the next cover of Out Magazine? :cool:

[Space Monkey]

Space Monkey (this goof should count for 3)

MMMMM, intelligent putdowns like that hurt me deeply. :lol:

Like they say, "consider the source".

[bigmack]

MMMMM, intelligent putdowns like that hurt me deeply.
Whoa, I figured you to be in your fallout shelter hiding from all the violent, racist, white, Republicans jacked-up on 'hate-speech'. :D

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/adu118.gif

[Space Monkey]

Whoa, I figured you to be in your fallout shelter hiding from all the violent, racist, white, Republicans jacked-up on 'hate-speech'.

Wow, I just don't know how to respond to all this intelligent :lol: criticism. I'm afraid that with every slam at me, it only proves my point that the repugs have brainwashed the less educated among us. Keep proving my point moron. The more you open your mouth the more obvious your ignorance becomes.

[Secretariat]

"Redistribution of income" is one of those phrases designed to evoke an emotional response. It is supposed to divide us into the responsible wage earner who is being forced to help the irresponsible slacker who refuses to earn his own way. This is the case in only a very small percentage of the cases.
The way in which wealth is now distributed is determined by the people who already have the most wealth. They determine that distribution in the way that is most favorable to them. Not just most favorable, but most favorable out of all proportion to their contribution. As a result of this control, some people must work for much less than what they have earned and some people do not have the oppportunity to earn anything at all.
Since, under the present system, we can not completely control what a business pays its employees, we use their tax money to help the less fortunate.

In other words we make them do what they should have done voluntarily.
You are going to say, "I give plenty to charity and I decide who is worthy of my charity." That may be true, or it may not, but do you know everyone who is "worthy" of your charity. If you give $10,000 in charitable contributions each year that is barely enough to provide for one family at the poverty level. So, whatever you do is not enough.
If you think this is socialism, so be it. Everything Socialist isn't bad; everything Capitalist isn't good. Everything that is done by the government isn't Socialism.

This is a good post, but I might add that Ronald Reagan may have been responsible for one of the largest "redistributions of wealth" ever perpetrated on actual American workers, when he dramatically lowered tax rates to benefit the wealthy.

See when there are large tax cuts to benefit the wealthy that is called "keeping what they earned" (even though in many cases that "income
has been derived via inheritance or through reinvestment of principal income), whereas the guy who actually does work - wage earners when he mentions redistribution of wealth is called a commie or a socialist or at the very least unAmerican.

[Valuist]

Let's "blame" Reagen for taking us out the Carter years. He only got us jump started for a good 20 year run. Not too bad. Obama won't be able to engineer a good economy for 1/10th of that.

[delayjf]

many cases that "income
has been derived via inheritance or through reinvestment of principal income), whereas the guy who actually does work - wage earners when he mentions redistribution of wealth is called a commie or a socialist or at the very least unAmerican.

Yeah, that's right - redistribution of wealth is one of the major principles of Communism and socialism, which are in fact unamerican. How about guys like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett who did not inherit their wealth, should they be allowed to keep what they earned? And as far as taxes go, may I remind you that the rich do pay for most of the bills in this country.

it only proves my point that the repugs have brainwashed the less educated among us PLEASE - I am so sick of the "liberal intellect" - what an oxymoron that term is. LIBERAL POLICY IS THE CAUSE OF OUR ECONOMIC SITUATION - you know the "right" to a home. All that supposed intellect and you guys keep trumping up the same old solutions that have failed in the past. And if someone should disagree with liberal ideology, their just full of hate - ha ha :lol:

[Secretariat]

Let's "blame" Reagen for taking us out the Carter years. He only got us jump started for a good 20 year run. Not too bad. Obama won't be able to engineer a good economy for 1/10th of that.

Reagan began the process of dismantling our manufacturing base and shipping it overseas, and turning America into a collection of service jobs. He vastly increased the debt at that time, spending money we didn't have without budgeting for it and while the US was not involved in a war abroad. He cut and ran out of a country after a terrorist attack on our own marines in Lebanon, giving into the culprits. He did nothing avenge to attack the culprits of the Iranian hostage to bring them to justice after Carter's humiliation there. During Reagan's admin he began funding the Mujhadein which we're currently fighting in the form of Al Queda (not to mention the Contra debacle). His pro-business look the other way approach to regulation helped set up the Savings and Loan fiasco in the later 80's. He did nothing to address AIDS, and abandoned the mentally ill to the streets.

But in relation to redistribution of wealth, he totally did that. Redistributing it to the wealthy by dramatic tax cuts that greatly benefitted the rich. It was not Reagan (or Clinton for that matter) that grew the economy the last 20 years, it was something called the expansion of technology most noticeably in growth of the personal computer, American developed software industries, and eventually the Internet, microwave technology, and personal video recorders.

After WW2 America had a monopoly on manufacturing and even textiles. Japan, and Germany were in ruins, and Mao in China was essentially creating a people's revolution. Our factories were king. Reagan in the 80's essentially gave away the store to industry for lower wages in other countries. He set in motion the largest single exportation of manufacturing in history from our country. While GW Bush was a puppet of Dick Cheney and his corporate friends, Reagan was much worse as a puppet of Don Regan and Wall Street, and what made Reagan more dangerous was that he was a fantastic speaker who spoke softly, with confidence, and had charm. But his Presidency really accelerated the deterioration of good manufacturing and blue collar jobs in this country. If that's your role model dig deeper. There's more to being a good president than simply exclaiming as the Soviet Union was already collapsing "Mr. Gorbachav, tear that down that wall."

Frankly, I rate Reagan as a more dangerous President than GW which is saying a lot.

[Secretariat]

Yeah, that's right - redistribution of wealth is one of the major principles of Communism and socialism, which are in fact unamerican. How about guys like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett who did not inherit their wealth, should they be allowed to keep what they earned? And as far as taxes go, may I remind you that the rich do pay for most of the bills in this country.

PLEASE - I am so sick of the "liberal intellect" - what an oxymoron that term is. LIBERAL POLICY IS THE CAUSE OF OUR ECONOMIC SITUATION - you know the "right" to a home. All that supposed intellect and you guys keep trumping up the same old solutions that have failed in the past. And if someone should disagree with liberal ideology, their just full of hate - ha ha :lol:

Guys like Buffet and Gates have already spoken of the inequity in the tax situation ,and have even stated they shoud be taxed more. Buffet was offended that he ws able to deduct more and pay less than his own secretary under the tax codes. Gates and Buffet have given hige amounts away for humanitarian purposes.

The rich pay most of the taxes and benefit the greatest in influence on how laws are drawn in this country. The rich pay the most in taxes because they control most of the wealth in this country.

Look at some of the information below. Income inequality is expanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

"Income inequality in the United States of America is the extent to which income, most commonly measured by household or individual, is distributed in an uneven manner, in the United States. While there seems to be consensus among social scientists that some degree of income inequality is needed, the extent of income inequality and its implications on society continue to be a subject of great debate, as they have been for over a century.[3] The majority of social scientists believe that income inequality currently poses a problem for American society with Alan Greenspan stating it to be a "very disturbing trend."[4][5] Meanwhile, other, mostly conservative social scientists argue that income inequality is mainly the result of more workers in the average household and their age and education, and that the disappearance of the middle class is more statistical than real[6] In a 2004 poll of 1,000 economists (from the AEA), a majority of polled economists favor "redistribution".[7] A study by the Southern Economic Journal found that "71 percent of American economists believe the distribution of income in the US should be more equal, and 81 percent feel that the redistribution of income is a legitimate role for government."[8] Data from the United States Department of Commerce and Internal Revenue Service indicate that income inequality has been increasing since the 1970s,[9][10][11][12][13] whereas it had been declining during the mid 20th century.[14][15] As of 2006, the United States had one of the highest levels of income inequality, as measured through the Gini index, among high income countries, comparable to that of some middle income countries such as Russia or Turkey,[16] being one of only few developed countries where inequality has increased since 1980.[17]

“ As I've often said... this [increasing income inequality] is not the type of thing which a democratic society—a capitalist democratic society—can really accept without addressing. - Alan Greenspan, June 2005


……………..

'According to new Internal Revenue Service data announced last week, income inequality in the U.S. is at its worst since the 1920s (before the Great Depression). The top percentile of wealthy Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, up from 19% in 2004, while the bottom 50% of wage earners earned 12.8% that year, down from 13.4% a year earlier."

[johnhannibalsmith]

...what made Reagan more dangerous was that he was a fantastic speaker who spoke softly, with confidence, and had charm...

This reminds me of someone in office now. Of course, the guy that couldn't string together a sentence without inventing a word or rewriting a phrase was considered "dangerous" for the opposite reason too, so I'm not really sure what kind of weight to give this assertion.

I can follow the logic throughout the rest of the post and even agree with pieces of it, but this portion stuck out as a bit of an unfair criticism considering what we've had and what he have and the conclusions many seem eager to make about their differences as an orator and how it reflects on their role in office.

[JustRalph]

Secretariat still singing the same old tune .........

How many years now? ..............

One word about Reagan and his tax cuts.

Find me one person who ever got a job from a poor man?

"A rising tide"........... you can finish it Sec.........

[Tom]

Secretariat still singing the same old tune .........

How many years now? ..............

One word about Reagan and his tax cuts.

Find me one person who ever got a job from a poor man?

"A rising tide"........... you can finish it Sec.........

Sec is a good little lock-stepper - they give and he posts. Almost always a parrot post, cut and pasted.

[Valuist]

Secretariat still singing the same old tune .........

How many years now? ..............

One word about Reagan and his tax cuts.

Find me one person who ever got a job from a poor man?

"A rising tide"........... you can finish it Sec.........

Great post. I was going to use the exact line about (nobody) getting a job from a poor man.

We haven't even touched on the whole ending the Cold War and the fall of communism bit, either.

[rastajenk]

Oh, you know, Mr. V, it was inevitable anyway; Reagan was just the guy in the right place at the right time...or so the story goes, I've heard.

[PaceAdvantage]

Keep proving my point moron.Awwww...another kind and gentle lefty posting here in off-topic. Thank you so much for abiding by the rules. :rolleyes:

[delayjf]

Guys like Buffet and Gates have already spoken of the inequity in the tax situation ,and have even stated they shoud be taxed more

Anyone at anytime can pay more taxes if they wish and despite their objections to the tax code they still rank 2 and 3 respectively on the wealthiest men list. The truth is they could donate half their net worth and it would not affect their life style one iota. Reagan’s tax cuts ushered an unprecedented era of prosperity in this country. And you forget it was the democrats who controlled congress and the money in the 80's. Reagan spent more on defense and won the cold war - Congress was responsible for the rest of the spending.

He cut and ran out of a country after a terrorist attack on our own marines in Lebanon, giving into the culprits. He did nothing avenge to attack the culprits of the Iranian hostage to bring them to justice Not entirely true, there were air strikes and the 1985 car bomb that was attributed to the CIA, not to mention US aid to Israel and Iraq during their conflicts with Hezbollah and Iran.

During Reagan's admin he began funding the Mujhadein which we're currently fighting in the form of Al Queda (not to mention the Contra debacle). I think you mean the Taliban who have provided aid to Al Qaeda. We supported the Northern Alliance who were also a part of the Mujahadein.

Income inequality is expanding
That’s right, but that’ due to the economy expanding. The lefts mistake IMO is to reason that the profit realized from investment in business some how takes money out of someone else’s pocket. But how much did you or I lose due to the growth of Microsoft? Anyone who wants to get in on the gravy train can invest their money and reap the benefits.

[GaryG]

I could hide my income if I wanted to, it would be a hassle though. If these bastards raise taxes to redistribute my $ to someone who "needs it more" I will just take it out of the income tax. No more ADWs, but I can live with that. FUBO!

[Leonard]

The lefts mistake IMO is to reason that the profit realized from investment in business some how takes money out of someone else’s pocket. But how much did you or I lose due to the growth of Microsoft? Anyone who wants to get in on the gravy train can invest their money and reap the benefits.

You made it all so simple a five year old could easily understand it. Unfortunately, progressives only think on a four year old level.

[boxcar]

Anyone at anytime can pay more taxes if they wish

And if every lib in this country did this, all the extra money they pitched in might be enough to move some homeless person out of his Corrugated Housing digs and into a 2/1 prefab home. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

That’s right, but that’ due to the economy expanding. The lefts mistake IMO is to reason that the profit realized from investment in business some how takes money out of someone else’s pocket. But how much did you or I lose due to the growth of Microsoft? Anyone who wants to get in on the gravy train can invest their money and reap the benefits.

First you need to earn money to invest. It's hard to become an investor when jobs are outsourced to India, China, etc. or when U.S. workers get paid squat for their efforts so investors will love upper management.

Also worth noting that the growth of Wal-mart hasn't cost me a dime either. But then I'm not employed by the Waltons so I'm not working to insure that four Waltons stay on the Forbes top 10 list of the richest people in the country while their employees earn peanuts. I'm also not affected by all the stuff made in China that Wal-mart sells. After all, I didn't lose my job because the Waltons decided to make even more money off of cheaper Chinese labor. Hell, I'm really not affected at all because I wouldn't be caught dead in a Wal-mart.

Delay, in a perfect world it wouldn't matter if good jobs in the U.S. were outsourced abroad or if salaries and benefits were slashed here so investors can make a bigger score. But the fantasy of the "what did you or I lose" argument is that well over half the U.S. population can't afford to invest in anything but getting by. So those people are only going to see investors get richer while they struggle to make ends meet in a shrinking jobs market. Hence, "Income inequality is expanding."

Leonard, maybe it takes a 6 year old to understand what I'm saying. :rolleyes:

[DJofSD]

If you have any kind of retirement account, you are an investor.

If you have an account with a stock broker, you are an investor.

If you are an employee of any local, county, state or federal agency, you are an investor.

[Leonard]

First you need to earn money to invest. It's hard to become an investor when jobs are outsourced to India, China, etc. or when U.S. workers get paid squat for their efforts so investors will love upper management.

Also worth noting that the growth of Wal-mart hasn't cost me a dime either. But then I'm not employed by the Waltons so I'm not working to insure that four Waltons stay on the Forbes top 10 list of the richest people in the country while their employees earn peanuts. I'm also not affected by all the stuff made in China that Wal-mart sells. After all, I didn't lose my job because the Waltons decided to make even more money off of cheaper Chinese labor. Hell, I'm really not affected at all because I wouldn't be caught dead in a Wal-mart.

Delay, in a perfect world it wouldn't matter if good jobs in the U.S. were outsourced abroad or if salaries and benefits were slashed here so investors can make a bigger score. But the fantasy of the "what did you or I lose" argument is that well over half the U.S. population can't afford to invest in anything but getting by. So those people are only going to see investors get richer while they struggle to make ends meet in a shrinking jobs market. Hence, "Income inequality is expanding."

Leonard, maybe it takes a 6 year old to understand what I'm saying. :rolleyes:

You missed the point delayjf made. But how much did you or I lose due to the growth of Microsoft? By your own admission, nothing. Instead, you are displaying the common liberal trait of envy. Others have money to invest therefore you begrudge them for having something others do not -- disposal income (which creates jobs, btw).

Maybe those Walmart employees getting by making peanuts that you feel sorry for should get an evening job delivering pizzas to the financially well-off. Then that money could go towards investments. Now, they too are in the investment class and have disposable incomes. Do you now begrudge them as well?

I think it was JustRalph who mentioned in a few other threads that he never saw someone willing to work two jobs who wasn't [eventually] successful. I agree. But maybe that is not fair to a liberal? Why should someone have two jobs when others only have one. That's not fair. They are gaming the system!

[Warren Henry]

First you need to earn money to invest. It's hard to become an investor when jobs are outsourced to India, China, etc. or when U.S. workers get paid squat for their efforts so investors will love upper management.



One can often find money to invest by cutting out other things he/she spends money on. I don't have a wide screen TV. I get my TV signal over the air. I drive cars until they are 25 years old. I don't pay to see movies (either in theaters or at home). I don't eat out a lot. My wife hardly ever purchases anything that isn't on sale. I tend to purchase computers at five year intervals and even then do not pay extra for the current state of the art. ETC. Because I live somewhat frugally, I have money to invest/gamble. Personal Choice.

The difference between conservatives and liberals is that we conservatives take responsibility for ourselves while liberals tend to blame their perceived hardships on others.

[Warren Henry]

First you need to earn money to invest. It's hard to become an investor when jobs are outsourced to India, China, etc. or when U.S. workers get paid squat for their efforts so investors will love upper management.



If you really wanted to get ahead, you could get a job at McDonalds or even WalMart and use the income from that job to invest. Probably wouldn't take much more time than you spend posting here on PA.

There are a lot of jobs available right now. Admittedly, many are not high paying or dignified, but they provide a means to get further ahead than where one is now.

Most of us who "have money", at one time or another, worked jobs that are perceived as beneath the dignity of some of those who complain about hardship.

Once again, personal choices make a difference.

[GaryG]

U.S. workers get paid squat for their efforts so investors will love upper management.Employees are paid what the employer figures that the job is worth. I believe Jeff (lsbets), who is an employer, discussed this at length some time back. Prospective workers can take it or leave it, quite simple. If it were not for those with money there would be no jobs for those who have none.

[NJ Stinks]

If you have any kind of retirement account, you are an investor.

If you have an account with a stock broker, you are an investor.

If you are an employee of any local, county, state or federal agency, you are an investor.

Less than 20% of the population has an account with a stock broker. What that means to me is that most of the other 80% can't afford to invest in Microsoft (for example) or they would have done so by now. What that also means to me is reducing or raising the capital gains tax means nothing personally to 80% of the country. Imagine that.

As for the rest of the "investors" you are referring to, these IRA investors have no control over the stocks bought and sold or the mutual fund.

Are you saying that all those people with IRA's through work are somehow part of the group that Delay was describing when he said "Anyone who wants to get in on the gravy train can invest their money and reap the benefits"? If so, I would define "anyone" as being less than 20% of the country's population - you know - the ones that actually can afford to play the stock market.

[NJ Stinks]

You missed the point delayjf made. But how much did you or I lose due to the growth of Microsoft? By your own admission, nothing. Instead, you are displaying the common liberal trait of envy. Others have money to invest therefore you begrudge them for having something others do not -- disposal income (which creates jobs, btw).

Maybe those Walmart employees getting by making peanuts that you feel sorry for should get an evening job delivering pizzas to the financially well-off. Then that money could go towards investments. Now, they too are in the investment class and have disposable incomes. Do you now begrudge them as well?

I think it was JustRalph who mentioned in a few other threads that he never saw someone willing to work two jobs who wasn't [eventually] successful. I agree. But maybe that is not fair to a liberal? Why should someone have two jobs when others only have one. That's not fair. They are gaming the system!

Get off the envy bullshit. It's gets old and it never was relevant.

[DJofSD]

One can often find money to invest by cutting out other things he/she spends money on. I don't have a wide screen TV. I get my TV signal over the air. I drive cars until they are 25 years old. I don't pay to see movies (either in theaters or at home). I don't eat out a lot. My wife hardly ever purchases anything that isn't on sale. I tend to purchase computers at five year intervals and even then do not pay extra for the current state of the art. ETC. Because I live somewhat frugally, I have money to invest/gamble. Personal Choice.

The difference between conservatives and liberals is that we conservatives take responsibility for ourselves while liberals tend to blame their perceived hardships on others.
And you, my friend, could be right out of the "The Millionaire Mind" (http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Millionaire-Mind/Thomas-J-Stanley/e/9780740718588/?itm=3&USRI=millionaires+mind) .

[johnhannibalsmith]

Less than 20% of the population has an account with a stock broker. What that means to me is that most of the other 80% can't afford to invest in Microsoft (for example) or they would have done so by now...

...If so, I would define "anyone" as being less than 20% of the country's population - you know - the ones that actually can afford to play the stock market.

You are leaping to a big conclusion here. The fact that only 20% invest in the stock market does not necessarily imply that 80% can not afford to.

I'm not an economist, so I'm not getting too involved here, but you are making a pretty faulty assumption that everyone that could potentially invest in the market does so.

[DJofSD]

Less than 20% of the population has an account with a stock broker. What that means to me is that most of the other 80% can't afford to invest in Microsoft (for example) or they would have done so by now. What that also means to me is reducing or raising the capital gains tax means nothing personally to 80% of the country. Imagine that.

As for the rest of the "investors" you are referring to, these IRA investors have no control over the stocks bought and sold or the mutual fund.

Are you saying that all those people with IRA's through work are somehow part of the group that Delay was describing when he said "Anyone who wants to get in on the gravy train can invest their money and reap the benefits"? If so, I would define "anyone" as being less than 20% of the country's population - you know - the ones that actually can afford to play the stock market.

You confuse ability with willingness.

What that tells me is the other 80% are either lazy, stupid or both.

Who says it has to Micro Soft? There are plenty of other ways to invest including buy mutual funds.

[NJ Stinks]

If you really wanted to get ahead, you could get a job at McDonalds or even WalMart and use the income from that job to invest. Probably wouldn't take much more time than you spend posting here on PA.



Warren, I've got bad news for you. I'm retired. That means I'm not looking for a part-time job so I can find money to invest. It also means that I can afford the time to post here all I want.

But thanks for telling me how to get ahead. Your condescending attitude is duly noted. :rolleyes:

[NJ Stinks]

You are leaping to a big conclusion here. The fact that only 20% invest in the stock market does not necessarily imply that 80% can not afford to.

I'm not an economist, so I'm not getting too involved here, but you are making a pretty faulty assumption that everyone that could potentially invest in the market does so.

I said "most of the other 80%". Big difference to me, anyway.

[NJ Stinks]

You confuse ability with willingness.

What that tells me is the other 80% are either lazy, stupid or both.



One of us lives in Fantasyland.

[NJ Stinks]

One can often find money to invest by cutting out other things he/she spends money on. I don't have a wide screen TV. I get my TV signal over the air. I drive cars until they are 25 years old. I don't pay to see movies (either in theaters or at home). I don't eat out a lot. My wife hardly ever purchases anything that isn't on sale. I tend to purchase computers at five year intervals and even then do not pay extra for the current state of the art. ETC. Because I live somewhat frugally, I have money to invest/gamble. Personal Choice.

The difference between conservatives and liberals is that we conservatives take responsibility for ourselves while liberals tend to blame their perceived hardships on others.

You know - everything was fine until I got to your last paragraph. You just couldn't help yourself. I'm a liberal without "perceived hardships". Ordinarily, I would say that blows up your last paragraph. But no such thing can happen in Fantasyland. :rolleyes:

[Warren Henry]

You know - everything was fine until I got to your last paragraph. You just couldn't help yourself. I'm a liberal without "perceived hardships". Ordinarily, I would say that blows up your last paragraph. But no such thing can happen in Fantasyland. :rolleyes:


Whether it is for themselves or for the ones they feel are getting screwed by the system.

I was not intimating that you personally wanted/needed to get ahead. If you are happy in your situation, rest easy.


My primary point is that there is little excuse for most people not to be able to better themselves. People who make excuses are either lazy or stupid (IMO).

Bear in mind that one has to be reasonable in his expectations. It would be a little far fetched to hope that I could better myself to the point that I could be as well off as Bill Gates by a year from now.

[Leonard]

I said "most of the other 80%". Big difference to me, anyway.

Out of curiosity, why don't you count non-broker investments? If you throw in all investment souces such as 401(k)s, Keoughs', etc. the number is very close to 50% of Americans with securities investments. Just because an individual's money is in mutual funds in a 401(k) doesn't mean they are not investing.

[NJ Stinks]

Whether it is for themselves or for the ones they feel are getting screwed by the system.

I was not intimating that you personally wanted/needed to get ahead. If you are happy in your situation, rest easy.


My primary point is that there is little excuse for most people not to be able to better themselves. People who make excuses are either lazy or stupid (IMO).

Bear in mind that one has to be reasonable in his expectations. It would be a little far fetched to hope that I could better myself to the point that I could be as well off as Bill Gates by a year from now.

Fair enough, Warren. Although I do think there is a big difference between being lazy and being stupid as far as excuses go.

[Steve 'StatMan']

As for the outrage over the "Birthers", there had to be 4-5 times more people claiming George Bush wasn't really elected president in 2000, most arguing it for the first four years, and many of them continuing through the 2nd term as well. But he won the election and the state of Florida per the election laws in place at the time of the election, and the laws regarding rules regarding recount requests and the deadlines for recounts and certifing election results. Many on the left, including the Late Nite TV hosts continued to perpretatrate the myth as if it were fact.

So there are likely to be "Birthers", or at least people making Birther Style jokes and insults for as long as Obama is President. Myself, I'm still skeptical, since no one alive can confirm how this certification of birth was obtain and filed, and that Hawaii, having recently becoming a state at the time, may or may not have had the stritctest of monitoring of such things at that time, in my mind, so who knows. But I'd rather spend my time focusing on other things - there are enough other people to do the clamoring and digging - if there is a finding, it wouldn't surprise me, but if authentic enough, hey, not an issue for me.

[NJ Stinks]

Out of curiosity, why don't you count non-broker investments? If you throw in all investment souces such as 401(k)s, Keoughs', etc. the number is very close to 50% of Americans with securities investments. Just because an individual's money is in mutual funds in a 401(k) doesn't mean they are not investing.

Delay was saying that anybody could invest in Microsoft if they wanted to. My point is that most people cannot afford to. Having a 401(k) at work does not mean people can afford to invest in Microsoft. Tons of clerical workers, secretaries, etc. have a 401(k) but do not have disposable income to risk in the stock market.

You may not agree with me but that's why I don't count non-broker investments.

[Tom]

Exactly, Steve, I am not as concerned with where he came from as I am with where he is going.....out of office, ASAP.
You never know where the cancer came from, you cut it out.
Obama is a cancer

[Valuist]

Delay was saying that anybody could invest in Microsoft if they wanted to. My point is that most people cannot afford to. Having a 401(k) at work does not mean people can afford to invest in Microsoft. Tons of clerical workers, secretaries, etc. have a 401(k) but do not have disposable income to risk in the stock market.

You may not agree with me but that's why I don't count non-broker investments.

How are they not invested in the stock market? If they don't have any disposable income then they aren't investing in 401(k). If they are, they must have a certain amount of disposable income.