Page 13 of 17 [ 250 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Nov 2016, 9:58 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Raptor wrote:
My idea of civil rights in a nutshell has more to do with self empowerment and having the right to be the captain of one's own destiny without big brother looking over our shoulder. I could make a numbered list but it would be lost on you.
There would be no coddling of any one group, no entitlements to get free stuff at the expense of others, and no right not to have one's feelings hurt, etc...

One area where I would break from conservative party lines would be to promote government intervention in the regulation of healthcare costs of any service over a certain dollar amount. This makes the medical industry atone for thier own greed instead of putting it on the shoulders of the citizen/taxpayer by forcing them to purchase a product (i.e. Obamacare) or raising thier taxes (standard liberal fix-all).


Kraichgauer wrote:
There isn't anything wrong with self empowerment, as long as it isn't done to take power and self-respect away from someone else. That's why there needs to be government intervention at times.

My way and your nanny state way can't co-exist.

Quote:
As for the rest of your Randian manifesto - you'd have a different view of things if you were in a marginalized group, or if you needed a helping hand just to live.

You must be talking about my health care reform idea here although you're not specific. No surprise to me that you'd prefer to allow the fat cats to keep getting fat while John Q. Citizen foots the bill for it. Hey, as long as you and yours have your Obamacare who cares about anyone else... :roll:

Quote:
I think Sly gave you an excellent answer.

Sly has already smoked you out as an anti-gunner so I doubt you'll be back in his good graces anytime soon.


As a matter of fact, Sly and I have had pleasant conversations via PM. I don't consider him rude or an adversary of any kind.

Maybe not yet but you tend to get on people's bad side. I've gotten several unsolicited PM's in the past year or so from various people about you that weren't very flattering.

Quote:
Yeah, right, I only care about myself, and don't care that fat cats get rich taking advantage of others.
In fact, that sounds more like your unregulated world of self empowered individuals straight out of a bad novel by Ayn Rand.

Rand again :roll:
Has it ever occurred to you that I might get just about all of my values from myself and my own observations?
And you never did directly reply to my plan for affordable healthcare.


Same can be said about PM's sent to me by other WP members about you.


Ah, but I thrive on notoriety. :D


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,951
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

28 Nov 2016, 10:01 pm

Raptor wrote:
BTDT wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
"repeal and replace" is turning out to be just "repeal" with nothing of substance that would actually cover the working class. and any senator of mine or congressman who votes for that, will not get my vote next time, I will be voting socialist.


Perhaps this will inspire true Americans to figure out clever solutions on their own instead of hoping that big government will come to the rescue. People will save for their retirement instead of relying on big government.

Aspies will have more time to explore and develop their unique talents--with the absence of government programs that try to force them to be "normal"--like it used to be.


I won't mention names, lest I be accused of trolling, but you'll find some people who have proven they can hold a full time job but for whatever reason have given up. They no longer even try to improve their own lot in the traditional way (e.g. work) and look solely to big government for all forms of wellbeing.


What do you know about anyone else's situation, skippy? All that shows is how lacking in sympathy you are for others, because of your own prejudices.
Yeah, right, I'm the one who brings negative emotions out of other people.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Nov 2016, 10:11 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
If the country sinks, then trust me, unless you're independently wealthy, then you're going to lose, too, pro-gun rights or not.


I can do manual machining and welding, I can work as a chef or butcher, and I can build and fix guns or most any other mechanical thing; I can work with anything up to and including Mad Max. What can you do?

More realistically, I'm prepared to take some short term pain in order to secure my rights long term, something that liberals never seem to have learned how to do.

Kraichgauer wrote:
And while you and some other gun rightsers are pro-health care, or pro-civil rights, I fear that the great majority are so enveloped by the right's ideology that they are not.


Which you know because you're so well acquainted with the majority of the gun people? More pointedly, you think you know them better than I do?

Kraichgauer wrote:
As for Reagan... again: I brought him up only to illustrate a point about the inconsistency of the right's interest in gun rights for all.


No one cares about Reagan, bringing up his position on guns now is about as relevant as pointing out that Democrats were long the party of southern racists, a point I know you're capable of grasping, but seemingly not of applying.


If you want to be Mad Max, I'll be the Postman, going from post apocalyptic settlement to settlement, telling stories for my dinner.

I bet you see conservatives as the Holnists.
Yep, I saw the movie and read the book but it was several years ago.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Evam
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2015
Posts: 309

28 Nov 2016, 10:21 pm

A multi-party system (ideally up to a maximum of 10 parties) would make it easier for candidates to hold an opinion different from their parties, so Republicans for example could be pro-medicare, anti-gun and non-Christian. That would make reforms, compromises and party programm shifts possible, and without so much acerbating fighting.

It makes more sense to first fight for a different elective system, and then for other political goals. You have to see where the resistance is, and how to break it. Medicare was a good intermediate target, but a reform of the elective system is the priority, and big resistance should not hold back people to pursue it. It should just make you come up with better explanations for this resistance, and with solutions and a strategy.



Last edited by Evam on 28 Nov 2016, 10:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Nov 2016, 10:21 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
BTDT wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
"repeal and replace" is turning out to be just "repeal" with nothing of substance that would actually cover the working class. and any senator of mine or congressman who votes for that, will not get my vote next time, I will be voting socialist.


Perhaps this will inspire true Americans to figure out clever solutions on their own instead of hoping that big government will come to the rescue. People will save for their retirement instead of relying on big government.

Aspies will have more time to explore and develop their unique talents--with the absence of government programs that try to force them to be "normal"--like it used to be.


I won't mention names, lest I be accused of trolling, but you'll find some people who have proven they can hold a full time job but for whatever reason have given up. They no longer even try to improve their own lot in the traditional way (e.g. work) and look solely to big government for all forms of wellbeing.


What do you know about anyone else's situation, skippy?

1. How did I get the name Skippy?
2. You certainly have no reservations about telling people about thier situations.

Quote:
All that shows is how lacking in sympathy you are for others, because of your own prejudices.

I'm sympathetic when and where it's due. For those whom it's not due I tell them sympathy is in the dictionary between shi+ and syphilis.
Quote:
Yeah, right, I'm the one who brings negative emotions out of other people.

Where's this coming from?


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Nov 2016, 10:33 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Democrats should of heeded the warnings from people about unchecked executive power and the rights of the minority in our democracy because they were told then that it would all come back to bite them. I think Trump will have a working majority and will be able to peel off vulnerable Democratic Senate votes many of which are up for reelection in 2018, he might not need to invoke the 'nuclear option' but he certainly has all the leverage to. Obstruction and simply not working with Trump is not an option, at least not a very intelligent one going forward considering the potential looming GOP super majority.

Obamacare was passed by a simple majority thru the budget process of reconciliation so it seems fair that it could be used in it's repeal & replacement. Fair is fair. Lets see how cooperative they are with judges because I would support the 'nuclear option' being applied to the SCOTUS as it has been so reduced under Obama with everything else, this is a unique time for the for the court with the amount of potential openings in the next 4 years to 8 years so it is an opportunity of cementing in justices who believe and uphold the constitution as it is written for the next generation. America really was at threat under Hillary Clinton, she despises the constitution and wishes to erode our most basic freedoms and while there is much work to be done it should be known how close we were to losing this country permanently.

We are much better off now than if we had elected non-functioning divided government and I think the markets have reflected that, those looking for retribution for the way they believe Obama was treated I think are foolish since Obama came in not needing a single Republican vote for anything and the concessions he made were strictly to moderates in their own party. Elections matter, majorities matter, I would not have much tolerance for attention seekers or ideological grand standers when it comes to filibusters and I feel this is all justified given how Obama abused the slim majorities that he had and lost(started with a super majory in both houses)

I am encouraged by some of the things I've heard from the incoming Democratic minority in the Senate(not hard to do considering they were under the leadership of Harry Reid before), Chuck Schumer has signaled that he will work with Trump on things that they agree about and that he wanted to force Trump to decide between his populist rhetoric and the free market principles of his party. I think this is where some of those vulnerable Democrats can really come into to play, infrastructure is something Democrats agree with and it's something that tangible that can be brought back home which there has not been much doing the last few yours with all the gridlock


Obama had to depend solely on Democratic votes in congress because the Republicans had made a concerted effort to block anything he wanted. And no, it wasn't necessarily because they disagreed with Obama, but due to total vindictiveness on their part.


Obama had such big majorities that he did not need to compromise or include Republicans in anything at the beginning of his presidency, I think he might of gotten more done if he never had a supermajority like that since of course the GOP would not cooperate if it is not even included in the process but their opposition really meant nothing the elections in 2010 and even when the GOP won Ted Kennedy's seat they still passed Obamacare thru with reconciliation. I think Democrats would be very foolish to think the voters will reward them obstruction.


Thing is, though, on the night of Obama's inauguration, the Republican house and senate leadership had met to conspire to slow government to a snail's pace in order to make Obama's Presidency a single term.

Thank gosh for that ord we'd not have the 2nd amendment. Obama would of regulated it away to nothing if the republicans hadn't stood up and said no!! ! !


Only according to said Republicans.


So there hasn't been anti-gun legislation proposed by democrats and/or passed into law?
Want a list?
How far back should I go?


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,306
Location: US

28 Nov 2016, 11:00 pm

Raptor wrote:
sly279 wrote:
That's where we disagree. I support ssi, ssi , food stamps and other such aid. I'd be freezing in the street or in a gang if not for it. Mean I have guns and want to live so mugging I guess :(


Raptor wrote:
The no-welfare thing is more pipe dream than anything. At this point we cannot simply do away with welfare programs. My plan if I had my way would keep welfare while at the same time pushing job training and placement programs at the same time. Also and equally important would be to create an environment friendly toward business establishment and growth. Yes, that means tax incentives and relaxed regulation. Even if that all worked splendidly we'd still need welfare programs but not nearly as much. It won't get any better than that from me and there's' plenty of room for it to be much more austere.


sly279 wrote:
People on ssi lie myself simply can't work it's why we're on it. No amount of job training will help us. I can't handle over 20hrs a week :(

Did you not see the underlined part about how we'd still have welfare programs, then a reiteration of it near the end?
Was it really necessary for me to specify we'll need welfare programs for Sly279? Do I have to write out the whole details of the plan?

sly279 wrote:
How would you pay for anything with giving business more tax relief. Most already don't pay taxes. And decrease regulation so they can go back to treating their employees as disposable cogs work them long hard hours til they get hurt and fire them and get a replacement ? No thanks we should keep regulations for safety, work habitat and hours along with treatment of employees.

Straw man much?
Where did I say they'd pay no taxes and operate unregulated?
If you don't make it inviting for businesses then there won't be any and they will go elsewhere.

Really, if you're looking for an adversary I can be that guy and I'm very good at it. :jester:


Well most people on the right cpdont see anything besides people in wheel chairs as disable and claim depression, autism, anisety, pstd are all just faking. It's people like me they talk about when they say people are rigging the system and stealing their money, cause I must just be faking so I don't have to work like them,since mental issues are all just make believe etc. I see it all the time on facebook from pro gun people whol lean right.

You miss understand. I said most companies already find a way to pay no taxes. They already get all kinds of tax reliefs.

You said you want to remove regulations. I don't see anything that's regulataed besides safety and how they treat their employees. That and don't pollute the environment to save a few dollars.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,951
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

28 Nov 2016, 11:39 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
BTDT wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
"repeal and replace" is turning out to be just "repeal" with nothing of substance that would actually cover the working class. and any senator of mine or congressman who votes for that, will not get my vote next time, I will be voting socialist.


Perhaps this will inspire true Americans to figure out clever solutions on their own instead of hoping that big government will come to the rescue. People will save for their retirement instead of relying on big government.

Aspies will have more time to explore and develop their unique talents--with the absence of government programs that try to force them to be "normal"--like it used to be.


I won't mention names, lest I be accused of trolling, but you'll find some people who have proven they can hold a full time job but for whatever reason have given up. They no longer even try to improve their own lot in the traditional way (e.g. work) and look solely to big government for all forms of wellbeing.


What do you know about anyone else's situation, skippy?

1. How did I get the name Skippy?
2. You certainly have no reservations about telling people about thier situations.

Quote:
All that shows is how lacking in sympathy you are for others, because of your own prejudices.

I'm sympathetic when and where it's due. For those whom it's not due I tell them sympathy is in the dictionary between shi+ and syphilis.
Quote:
Yeah, right, I'm the one who brings negative emotions out of other people.

Where's this coming from?


I tell people about their situations? Other than sticking up for the needy, disabled, and marginalized, and condemning those that attack the aforementioned groups, I fail to see what you mean.
And if skippy hits a nerve, then it fits.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 93,878
Location: the island of defective toy santas

28 Nov 2016, 11:42 pm

^^^in terms of calling people on WP names they don't like, it would be better if we left that behavior to the other side. ;) when they go low, we go high. :star:



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,951
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

28 Nov 2016, 11:43 pm

auntblabby wrote:
^^^in terms of calling people on WP names they don't like, it would be better if we left that behavior to the other side. ;) when they go low, we go high. :star:


Thank you of reminding me of that fact, my friend. 8)


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 93,878
Location: the island of defective toy santas

28 Nov 2016, 11:45 pm

^^^prego :)



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,306
Location: US

28 Nov 2016, 11:59 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Democrats should of heeded the warnings from people about unchecked executive power and the rights of the minority in our democracy because they were told then that it would all come back to bite them. I think Trump will have a working majority and will be able to peel off vulnerable Democratic Senate votes many of which are up for reelection in 2018, he might not need to invoke the 'nuclear option' but he certainly has all the leverage to. Obstruction and simply not working with Trump is not an option, at least not a very intelligent one going forward considering the potential looming GOP super majority.

Obamacare was passed by a simple majority thru the budget process of reconciliation so it seems fair that it could be used in it's repeal & replacement. Fair is fair. Lets see how cooperative they are with judges because I would support the 'nuclear option' being applied to the SCOTUS as it has been so reduced under Obama with everything else, this is a unique time for the for the court with the amount of potential openings in the next 4 years to 8 years so it is an opportunity of cementing in justices who believe and uphold the constitution as it is written for the next generation. America really was at threat under Hillary Clinton, she despises the constitution and wishes to erode our most basic freedoms and while there is much work to be done it should be known how close we were to losing this country permanently.

We are much better off now than if we had elected non-functioning divided government and I think the markets have reflected that, those looking for retribution for the way they believe Obama was treated I think are foolish since Obama came in not needing a single Republican vote for anything and the concessions he made were strictly to moderates in their own party. Elections matter, majorities matter, I would not have much tolerance for attention seekers or ideological grand standers when it comes to filibusters and I feel this is all justified given how Obama abused the slim majorities that he had and lost(started with a super majory in both houses)

I am encouraged by some of the things I've heard from the incoming Democratic minority in the Senate(not hard to do considering they were under the leadership of Harry Reid before), Chuck Schumer has signaled that he will work with Trump on things that they agree about and that he wanted to force Trump to decide between his populist rhetoric and the free market principles of his party. I think this is where some of those vulnerable Democrats can really come into to play, infrastructure is something Democrats agree with and it's something that tangible that can be brought back home which there has not been much doing the last few yours with all the gridlock


Obama had to depend solely on Democratic votes in congress because the Republicans had made a concerted effort to block anything he wanted. And no, it wasn't necessarily because they disagreed with Obama, but due to total vindictiveness on their part.


Obama had such big majorities that he did not need to compromise or include Republicans in anything at the beginning of his presidency, I think he might of gotten more done if he never had a supermajority like that since of course the GOP would not cooperate if it is not even included in the process but their opposition really meant nothing the elections in 2010 and even when the GOP won Ted Kennedy's seat they still passed Obamacare thru with reconciliation. I think Democrats would be very foolish to think the voters will reward them obstruction.


Thing is, though, on the night of Obama's inauguration, the Republican house and senate leadership had met to conspire to slow government to a snail's pace in order to make Obama's Presidency a single term.

Thank gosh for that ord we'd not have the 2nd amendment. Obama would of regulated it away to nothing if the republicans hadn't stood up and said no!! ! !


Only according to said Republicans.


Yeah no according to the democrats. Who constantly talk about how the republicans are in the way of their gun control plans and throw tantrums over it.
I pay very close attention to congress and politicians when it comes to gun control. I search google every day for gun control, I even have it as a favorite on my apple news app. It's mostly news about some democrat pushing for gun control, or throwing a tantrum cause they can't get guns banned. You turn a blind eye to it cause you either do support it and just trying to put out you dont(I think it's this) or you support evil actions as long as they democrats.

Kinda like the Cold War "yeah he's a ruthless murdering dictator, but he's our ruthless murdering dictator" evil actions are not ok just cause their your side. You should call them out and vot them out of office for violating their oaths to the constitution. Then elect constitutional democrats and reshape the party, until then I'll continue to vote republican



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,306
Location: US

29 Nov 2016, 12:02 am

auntblabby wrote:
Evam wrote:
yelekam wrote:
firemonkey wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
it's the fault of these bigoted identitarian maniacs who hate democracy. This has been brewing for a long time.


True democracy wouldn't have someone who got nearly 2m more votes losing an election.


Under this nation's constitution it does. Its a composite of 51 state popular votes transmitted into apportioned representatives for the aggregate total.


A two-party system is less democratic than a system with 3 to 10 parties. It is polarizing, which is disfunctional for a democracy, and leading to anxieties and radicalization.

I wonder what it is about amuurica that makes it so allergic to a viable 3rd party?

It's too entrenched . Neither side wants to lose, and that's exactly what'll happen if they go to a 3rd party and thline other side doesn't. The last 3rdish party cost the democrats the election and put a republican Lincoln in office. There hasn't been a serious 3rd choice that I know of since. I bet that's also what brought about the current primary situation here only one person can run per party.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,701
Location: Aux Arcs

29 Nov 2016, 12:12 am

Skippy?LOL


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 93,878
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Nov 2016, 12:14 am

if there was a liberal party here, I believe it would free the centrists to be centrists.