Hooray! The forum is back!

IntensityInsanity:

Anton, I've read through all your stuff but I really still don't get why you had this big change of heart.  You said you voted for Obama and would vote for him again.  What did you like about Obama to begin with?  Was it his vast political experience, or perhaps the many positions he has taken as a senator by his votes?  Or perhaps were you impressed with the great people he surrounded himself with in his life?  Ok, so now that he's been prez for a while, what has he done that made you say you would vote for him again?  Are you impressed with all his apologies all over the world?  Maybe two very impressive supreme court judges he has nominated?  Or maybe all the cabinet positions he has assigned?  Like Geitner, head of IRS?  Perhaps you're impressed with his handling of the oil spill in the gulf?

Never considered his "political experience". The issue we have is with "experienced" politicians. He was sold as "change" candidate. Did he bring about ALL the change he promised? HAlfway through his term, he clearly hadn't. But it does not make me dislike him. He certainly did not do the _opposite_ of what he promised, unlike many politicans I know. Are some of his cabinet members like "Turbo Tax Timmy Geithner" deuschebags? Sure! But no one cabinet is perfect. As to the apologies around the world, this sounds like something off Faux News channel. Show me examples of these so-called "apologies" and I would address each individually. As to the Supreme Court, after their no-cap-on-$-political-contributions ruling, anything pretty much goes. Remember, the Prez nominates a judge, and Congress approves. The Congress did not seem to have issues approving them, so why should I?

The whole oil spill doesn't have anything to do with Obama. Did he spill the oil? No. Did he sign the "Deep Water Royalty Relief Act"? No. Did he bring cocane to the MMS orgy parties? No. The oil spill doesn't have anything to do with the Prez, in my opinion. I had to change front brake wheel pads on my car last week .No it wasn't Obama's fault.

IntensityInsanity:

You said you are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  Now, I know that you take a more liberal stand on immigration.  Fine, but what about all the other social issues?  Let's see how liberal you are:

 

1) do you still think that racism is rampant and affirmative action is necessary?  To which extreme do you take this?  Do you agree with Cynthia McKiney that we are racist because we don't have enough hurricane names with the name 'Jamal' or 'Lakesha'?

Come on. That's just silly. What do I care about Cynthia McKiney or some other hyper-racist tool? And what does it have to do with Obama? And no, I do not support affirmative action, but Obama did not invent it. You seriously do not expect a black President to fight affirmative action, do you? I am just being realistic here.

IntensityInsanity:

  

2) Do you feel that a great injustice is being done toward gays and that by not allowing them to get married we are treating them like blacks in the 20's or 30's?

This is a cultural issue, not politics. People seem to confuse the two all the time. For better or for worse, this country had passed the "good old times" when moral and cultural issues could be regulated by law. You know once they de-criminalized sodomy, everything else was in the wings. And no, gay and black rights are definitely not one and the same.

IntensityInsanity:

   

3) I know you have two beautiful kids.  Do you want them learning sex ed in 2nd or 3rd grade?  Do you want them being taught that a normal family isn't necessarily mommy + daddy + kids but can just as legitimately be daddy + daddy + kids?

This is more of a fear tactic. Do I want them learning sex ed in the 2nd grade? No, and no one is teaching them sex ed in the 2nd grade. If and when this does happen, I would have to deal with the issue at that particular juncture. I am pretty positive many other parents feel the same and we would be able to address it, should it ever come up.

IntensityInsanity:

    

Truth is, Bush was a shitty president (for the most part) and was fiscally liberal, started questionable wars (If you saw the Oliver Stone movie, "W", I think it provides an interesting reason as to Bush's mistake with Iraq).  So your response seems to be a knee-jerk reaction but I figured you for someone more stable than that.  Has Travales maybe been brainwashing you?  He is the best liberal/democrat mouthpiece I've ever talked to.  Far better then Snake or any other liberals I've ever talked to.

I wasn't a fan of GW, and I did vote for his second term, and do not regret it. There were no other candidates. Just like there was no opposition to Obama. An old man and a slutty stewardess looking boob? Are you kidding?

IntensityInsanity:

   

Seriously, do me a favor:  really answer all of my points directly.  I know that turning into a liberal means never responding to direct arguments and all, but I hope you're better than that.

never responding to direct arguments...you are making it liberal vs conservative again. I thought we agreed there is no such thing. A weed smoker can never consider themselves trully conservative. This would be lying to yourself. Like being white and applying to NAACP.

IntensityInsanity:

   

And honestly, I'm disappointed that you mentioned that not voting for Obama or being opposed to him is racial.  Seriously?  You're really on that bandwagon?  You really honestly think that a guy like me doesn't like Obama even partially because he's a black guy?  Coming from you, Anton, it's said to hear that you think this.

I guess I am on "that" bandwagon. Notice, I did not say ALL Obama opposition is racial. Cerainly not. But there is a fair amount of racial hatred there, and it is pretty noticeable, if you look. Like I said before, I don't have a dog in this black white issue, but I find any type of racial hatred unacceptable. A bunch of white folks don't want to see this uppity N in the White House, it is that simple. I wish he wins 2nd term, so they could choke on their vitriol.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Evgeny:

II, you should've been more vocal in Bush's last term and say some of your thoughts before Obama had made a checkmate to republicans. Obama is a far left liberal and that is what people wanted after suffering the Bush idiocy. Ups and downs are part of our life.

Ok, to respond to what you said.  I should have been more vocal.  I don't think it would have made much difference.  I didn't vote at all so doesn't matter.  Even if I voted, both Alabama (where I lived then) and Georgia (where I live now) didn't vote for Obama, so my vote really wouldn't have mattered.

Furthermore, to be honest, I didn't really realize a lot of stuff about Bush until after.

Unfortunately, the whole policy in the US of 'oh, this republican did bad, so let's get a leftist in there' or 'this lib did horrible so let's get a right-winger in there' is a very odd thing and quite a sign that the voting majority are idiots, plain and simple.

But what's even more surprising is how stupid both parties are.  Here's the problem:  So Bush completely  fuсked up, and Democrats know that for sure now they can get their guy in.  So what do they do?  Instead of finding a guy like Clinton, you know, a more or less moderate democrat, or maybe even Lieberman, or heck, maybe even a little more left than that.  But instead, they go extreme.  They give us Obama, who is not only extreme left with extreme left connections, but also just completely inexperienced and absolutely incompetent.  Which means that in 4 years after Obama gets put into power we get another republican.  Because people were tired of Bush, but didn't really want Obama.  People are just stupid, just large masses of plebians voting emotionally.  And again they will vote emotionally in 2012 when they realize what a moron they stuck in office.  And possibly, the 2012 prez will also be some rollercoaster candidate.

So, Evgeny, Obama is no checkmage to republicans.  In fact, Obama is their last hope.  After Bush, Dems were left with presidency, control of house and senate.  What more could you ask for?  This is indeed, a typical chess problem, a 'mate in 2' type of simple solution.  However, even this the democrats messed up.  Now in November most likely Dems will lose control (or some of it) in house + senate and most likely the 2012 presidency.  So though there was a checkmate possibility, democrats didn't find the right move and instead Republicans now have a chance to come back.  Will they come back?  Who knows.  For sure they will come back in 2012 but will they be able to get a two-termer in there that doesn't leave people with a bad taste in their mouth?  who knows....

IntensityInsanity:

Evgeny:

II, you should've been more vocal in Bush's last term and say some of your thoughts before Obama had made a checkmate to republicans. Obama is a far left liberal and that is what people wanted after suffering the Bush idiocy. Ups and downs are part of our life.

Ok, to respond to what you said.  I should have been more vocal.  I don't think it would have made much difference.  I didn't vote at all so doesn't matter.  Even if I voted, both Alabama (where I lived then) and Georgia (where I live now) didn't vote for Obama, so my vote really wouldn't have mattered.

Furthermore, to be honest, I didn't really realize a lot of stuff about Bush until after.

Unfortunately, the whole policy in the US of 'oh, this republican did bad, so let's get a leftist in there' or 'this lib did horrible so let's get a right-winger in there' is a very odd thing and quite a sign that the voting majority are idiots, plain and simple.

But what's even more surprising is how stupid both parties are.  Here's the problem:  So Bush completely  fuсked up, and Democrats know that for sure now they can get their guy in.  So what do they do?  Instead of finding a guy like Clinton, you know, a more or less moderate democrat, or maybe even Lieberman, or heck, maybe even a little more left than that.  But instead, they go extreme.  They give us Obama, who is not only extreme left with extreme left connections, but also just completely inexperienced and absolutely incompetent.  Which means that in 4 years after Obama gets put into power we get another republican.  Because people were tired of Bush, but didn't really want Obama.  People are just stupid, just large masses of plebians voting emotionally.  And again they will vote emotionally in 2012 when they realize what a moron they stuck in office.  And possibly, the 2012 prez will also be some rollercoaster candidate.

So, Evgeny, Obama is no checkmage to republicans.  In fact, Obama is their last hope.  After Bush, Dems were left with presidency, control of house and senate.  What more could you ask for?  This is indeed, a typical chess problem, a 'mate in 2' type of simple solution.  However, even this the democrats messed up.  Now in November most likely Dems will lose control (or some of it) in house + senate and most likely the 2012 presidency.  So though there was a checkmate possibility, democrats didn't find the right move and instead Republicans now have a chance to come back.  Will they come back?  Who knows.  For sure they will come back in 2012 but will they be able to get a two-termer in there that doesn't leave people with a bad taste in their mouth?  who knows....

So do you mean to say Clinton was a great President? As long as I can remember, each President here continued to pillage the country. America is all about money. Money rules everything here, directly or indirectly. My best suggestion would be at reading the "Sold Out Report" from Wall Street Watch group. It lays out what happened, where and how, in precise detail. No one says Republicans are the ONLY guilty party. Democrats are just as bad, but Democrats never promised not to be Democracts - they did what they have always done. The crisis was brought on by Republicans trying to be like Democrats and forgoing their role as a counter-weight. Now, they are trying to appear nothing short of KKK to reclaim their turf. Maybe too late...

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Here is a FRESH example

Republicans block campaign finance disclosure bill

 http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/27/campaign.finance/index.html?hpt=Sbin

Republicans do not want any campaign donor disclosure because ....."it's like changing rules in the middle of the game". This is all they got to offer. It's all one big f--ing game, you see.

Everyone in the world knows why Republicans oppose finance reform. Citizens United vs. FEC was the biggest gift ever granted by an activist Supreme Court. It was blatantly partisan, an excessive grab for power exclusively on behalf of the Republican party and corporate America. John Robert's court has done this with the full knowledge and intent to hurt Democrats while providing massive financial aid the Republican Party. They will use this unlimited power of corporate wealth to put the thumb down permanently on the side of moneyed interests, against the interests of the majority of the American public. All the while they will laugh at poor redneck tools for voting in the Republican politicians who made it all possible. They will give a collective middle finger to the American public. 
The Republican party: un-American, anti-democratic and increasingly entrenched in corporate cash. It is entirely beholden to the interests of big business. There is no longer room at the table for anyone who is not already rich.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

Here is a FRESH example

I don't see anything "fresh", either in this, or in some of the other outrages you posted here (like that "sold out America" thing).  These issues exist since the inception of this country, and any other country. I am not minimizing the seriousness of these outrages, i might even egree with you on most of them.  But the less short-term our frame of reference, the more both parties responsibility for creating these problems, and the unwillingness to solve them, average out to about the same.  Projecting this historical truth into the future, the moment it is politically adventageous, it will again be the liberals obstructing the conservative's attempts to address these issues going into election cycles.

Egor:

AHTOH:

Here is a FRESH example

I don't see anything "fresh", either in this, or in some of the other outrages you posted here (like that "sold out America" thing).  These issues exist since the inception of this country, and any other country. I am not minimizing the seriousness of these outrages, i might even egree with you on most of them.  But the less short-term our frame of reference, the more both parties responsibility for creating these problems, and the unwillingness to solve them, average out to about the same.  Projecting this historical truth into the future, the moment it is politically adventageous, it will again be the liberals obstructing the conservative's attempts to address these issues going into election cycles.

My point is everyone needs to stop playing games and clean up the effed mess

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

few comments on your last post, since II is not replying :)

AHTOH:

He was sold as "change" candidate. Did he bring about ALL the change he promised? HAlfway through his term, he clearly hadn't. But it does not make me dislike him. He certainly did not do the _opposite_ of what he promised, unlike many politicans I know.

The problem was that he very vaguely defined "change" during the campaign.  It appeared to me like he was willing to have each voter interpret "change" as "fixing whatever i don't like abt this country/governemnt".  The strategy worked.  To me, I thought he meant things like transparency, competence, fighting corruption, bipartisanship, fiscal common sense, valuing public opinion, etc.  Because he did hint oll of these things.  I , of course didn't necessarily believe him, but that is what I thought *could* make him a decent president. On each of these issues, he is eaither worse than those before him, or, arguably, the same.  I understand he is limited by the situation he was handed, and can;t do these things overnight, but I am not seeing even his concerns about these things, nor an aptitude to command leadership on any of these issues. Sorry.

AHTOH:

The whole oil spill doesn't have anything to do with Obama. Did he spill the oil? No. Did he sign the "Deep Water Royalty Relief Act"? No. Did he bring cocane to the MMS orgy parties? No. The oil spill doesn't have anything to do with the Prez, in my opinion. I had to change front brake wheel pads on my car last week .No it wasn't Obama's fault.

100% agreed.  I blame liberals and environmentalists for forcing drilling so far offshore, I blame conservatives for opposing regulation. Obviously, BP itself. Obama was not responsible for any of that.  The attacks on Obama by the conservative media on this issue are cowardly and disgusting.

AHTOH:

  And no, I do not support affirmative action, but Obama did not invent it.

Again, how does it matter who invented it?  If you oppose it, a president who supports it is FAR worse than someone who invented it and whose opinion is now irrelevant.

AHTOH:

You seriously do not expect a black President to fight affirmative action, do you? I am just being realistic here.

Actually, I do.  I expect it to be repealed by a black, conservative president.  Liberals can't repeal it because they do not believe in racial equality, white conservatives cannot repeal it because they'll be called racist by the mainstream media. It can only be a black conservative. Is Alan Keyes still around?

AHTOH:

Notice, I did not say ALL Obama opposition is racial. Cerainly not. But there is a fair amount of racial hatred there, and it is pretty noticeable, if you look. Like I said before, I don't have a dog in this black white issue, but I find any type of racial hatred unacceptable. A bunch of white folks don't want to see this uppity N in the White House, it is that simple. I wish he wins 2nd term, so they could choke on their vitriol.

Please state your evidence. You are using a double-standard. Based on facts, its actually easier to argue the opposite, that black people voting for obama are racist.  Because they have never in their lives voted for a white person.  And probably never will.  In fact they don't vote at all unless somoene black runs.  Can you imagine if white people were that racist? 

This is the double-standard test: I asked you earlier in this (or some other) topic: what if a black conservative runs, you obviously vote against him, (unless you change sides 1 or 3 or any odd number of times by then), and then I will look you in the face and call you a racist, and ask you to choke on vitriol.

Your response was "whoaaaaa". 

Well played.

AHTOH:

My point is everyone needs to stop playing games and clean up the effed mess

That's what the tea party is saying.  I am not defending them, but I agree with your statement, and so do they.  The two parties today (and you did not attempt to contradict this point) just kick the can back and forth.  Only looking at  2-4-8 year incremenst, can one make a statement that one of the two parties favors resolution of some of these issues.  In reality, these problems will not be addressed or resolved by either party in its present state.  Period.  These problems are not seen as anything other than election mechanisms.

This is not what teabaggers are saying. What they are saying (in their 3rd grade spelling and calligraphy) is "Taxed Enought Already" and "we are for the small government". Neither "idea" holds any relevance.

1. As you may know, current tax levels are the lowest in the last several decades. Most recently, Bush's Congress passed tax cuts for the uber-rich, making federal budget even more difficult to sustain. Personally, I am not complaining. I am in the top 10% of earners, and I understand that my taxes may have to come up eventually. This is normal. If some individuals or businesses think it's excessive, they are welcome to move to another tax jurisdiction, but somehow I doubt they will.

2. Most expensive federal budget items are social security, medicare/medicaid, military/defense and farm subsidies. I doubt teabaggers being mostly white and boomers are refusing their social security or medicare checks. The minute I see one of them burning their Social Security check in protest, I'll be willing to listen to more of their rants. So far, they have demonstrated they can't spell, that they are 100% white mourning the loss of the white priviledge, and that they are uneducated and ignorant, in general. I would not want to be a part of that demographic, if you know what I mean. If someone were serious about cleaning up the effed mess, they would advocate the following:

A. Resolve trade deficit. Encourage more exports and bring the manufacturing base back to the US. 
B. Resolve budget deficit. Increase IRS crackdowns and audits on businesses and individuals. Increase crackdown on offshoring.
C. Shut down failed and bailed banks. Hand them off to FDIC for a wind down.
D. Strengthen role of SEC and clean up their employees.
E. Slash defense programs and instead support NASA activities.

As you can tell, a number of government agencies would naturally have a role in such efforts. This is why we do not need "less government", we need more efficient and effective government, and MORE OF IT WHERE IT COUNTS (like IRS, SEC and FDIC).

As to the teabaggers, they show painfully clear as to how ignorant the voter base here is. These simpletons still believe that there are some easy, simple, 2-bit solutions that could lead us to success. Or that their interpretation of Constitution prevails over everyone else's. They are nothing but a bunch of midly retarded individuals who are facing the hard truth that their small insignificant lives were basically a fraud and a lie, and now they have endebted their own childred, and grandchildren due to their own stupidity. So rail about Socialism and Obama-Hitler connection. Come on.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

1. As you may know, current tax levels are the lowest in the last several decades. Most recently, Bush's Congress passed tax cuts for the uber-rich, making federal budget even more difficult to sustain. Personally, I am not complaining. I am in the top 10% of earners, and I understand that my taxes may have to come up eventually. This is normal. If some individuals or businesses think it's excessive, they are welcome to move to another tax jurisdiction, but somehow I doubt they will.

The "last several decades" is not a baseline.  We have indeed seen wealth-creators move to other jurisdictions or leave this nation entirely.  With Europe seemingly in a long-term trend of tax cuts in order to attract commerce (used to be our advantage over them), it is not wise for us to use arbitrary baselines.  In the age of globalism, our tax rate is no longer just an internal revenue collecting tool, it is now a mechanism of attracting/repelling global commerce based on relative rates elsewhere.  This is not just an opinion, it is a mathematical certainty.

As far as the compaints from the populace, it is mostly based (seems to me) on the democrats wanting to raise taxes (repeal Bush Tax cuts, as the democrats call it).  The way this political system works, no tax cuts are actually needed to win elections at this time.  Just not raising them will suffice for now.  What happens longer-term - we will see.

AHTOH:

2. Most expensive federal budget items are social security, medicare/medicaid, military/defense and farm subsidies. I doubt teabaggers being mostly white and boomers are refusing their social security or medicare checks. The minute I see one of them burning their Social Security check in protest, I'll be willing to listen to more of their rants. So far, they have demonstrated they can't spell, that they are 100% white mourning the loss of the white priviledge, and that they are uneducated and ignorant, in general. I would not want to be a part of that demographic, if you know what I mean. If someone were serious about cleaning up the effed mess, they would advocate the following:

I would not include social security, as it is a different tax, and a different issue which is a constitutional argument.  As far as the rest of this, just more baseless slandering.  I would say their average IQ is about on-par with any political movement I have ever seen.  And some of them, i am sure, more than you and I combined.  I don;t know what it is you think you are accomplishing by this constant cowardly slandering from the safety of your computer monitor.

AHTOH:

 A. Resolve trade deficit. Encourage more exports and bring the manufacturing base back to the US. 

As with the immigration issue, you support a result without supporting the means of achieving it.  We do have some hope of recovering SOME manufacturing with the expected hyperinflation, but even that benefit will be killed in its infancy with your outlook on taxation, and with the ruling party's outlook on benefits, health care, pensions, unions, etc.  You have got to be an sadomasochist to open a manufacturing plant in the US in this environment.  Or a charity worker.

AHTOH:

 B. Resolve budget deficit.

Tea party is against that?  At least they endorse politicians with the desire and track record of cutting waste. 

AHTOH:

 Increase IRS crackdowns and audits on businesses and individuals.

I don;t disagree if this tax system is kept intact, it certainly needs to be better enforced.  Too many people don;t pay taxes, or cheat. But tea party endorses something even better.  Flat tax (or even Fair tax, which i am not so sure about) would make your tax liability a mathematical calculation, and the entire IRS can be replaced with a  $300 computer.  Since we are on the subject of cutting waste. 

AHTOH:

  Increase crackdown on offshoring

How can you crack down on what has moved outside of your jurisdiction?  Like its not enough that we lost the branch offices, now let's lose the headquarters of these companies as well? Don't get me wrong, I am all for dealing with the root cause, have always advocated it here. But just dealing with the side effects only makes the desease worse. 

AHTOH:

 C. Shut down failed and bailed banks. Hand them off to FDIC for a wind down.

Tea party, with their low IQ compared to yours, have figured this out 2 years ago.

AHTOH:

 
E. Slash defense programs and instead support NASA activities.

I am all for NASA after the budget is balanced.  Not before.  As far as defense, its a tough issue.. Are you prepared to go point by point on what to "slash" and become personally accountable to the American public for the risk that carries?  Politicians certainly aren't.  I am generally fine with defence budget for a country of our caliber being pretty huge. Again, budget was balanced in this country with military spending not significantly different from today, in terms of percentage of GDP or deficit. I would focus more on bang for the buck.  There's a lot of unjustified spending where private military contractors make huge sums of money providing little in return. There needs to be more competition and "shopping around".

Egor, see my post on the other thread re teabaggers, in response to II.

They are what I call American Proletariat. Mostly aged and white, they lived their entire lives without a clue about politics or budget deficits, or reality for that matter. They have followed these topics on TV and probably held themselves in high regard about being knowledgable. But reality shows that these people (the boomers) have let the country down the path of destruction. What was built for generations before them they have squandered in their lifetime, and have have left their children and grandchildren heavily indebted to China and Arab Emirates. You can't argue with that. Then, when the alarms sounded and the roof was literally on fire, they jumped into action, talking about "small govimint", basically rehashing what their Hollywood actor turned folk hero Reagan told them back in the days and now largely irrelevant and inapplicable. They are irrelevant as a political force because they do not have any specific agenda, except simple 2-bit rants like "government is the problem" and "taxed enough already". It's the generation that was duped into Vietnam war and started the sexual and drug revolution. These are the hippies and the LSD abusers from back in 60s. You would think they would wise up now?

Don't take me wrong, I am all for the popular uprizing, etc. But there has to be some intelligent life in the driver seat. With the tea party, there is none to speak of. Popular tea party icons like Sarah Palin illustrate my point further. The known tea party politicians like Rand Paul and Sharon Angle further demonstrate the idiocy, telling the nation that their aspirations are:

1. The elimination of Department of Education. Really, who needs education these days? Not these bozos.
2. Repeal of Civil Rights Act and cancelation of protection for handicapped people. Free markets apparently will prevent any abuses going forward. Complete nonsense, in other words.
3. Rabbidly anti-immigrant. Not just illegal immigrant - any immigrant. Pure Klan.

If you think this is a worthwile agenda to pursue, I may have mistaken you for someone capable of independent thought...

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

One thing about independent thought, Anton, is it might in many instances lead a person of equal or higher intelligence level than you, to drastically different conclusions from yours. 

Do you allow for that possibility?

I do.