Political Compromise

Post Reply New Topic

Thinking about my positions and being reasonable is just a normal day for me. I don't need to pretend once a year.

I don't really like the emphasis on going after what's left of unions in this country.

I'm just more concerned in cutting foreign aide, ending the wars, and forcing banks to pay back their bailout money, the real massive bastions of government spending.

Compromise is pretty much built into our system. I really doubt the will of the people even gets represented, simply because people always compromise their beliefs in some way. They figure, even if a candidate doesn't represent 100% of their views, they can at least get 70% in. There's no guarantee of this, because all politicians break campaign promises.

They just say s**t for people to vote for them. The real people they answer to are their corporate backers.

Most of the banks have given back their bailout money. If anything some of them gave it back before they were really on their feet, putting us back in danger.

We also turned a profit on the banks that have given back their bailout so far.

Who hasn't paid back their bailouts are AIG and GM.

Coming from the physical incarnation of Keith Ogrebite, I'll take that as a compliment.

Who the hell is Keith Ogrebite?
Sounds like a Nerdy Viking.
Wait if this Mr. Ogrebite is a person wouldn't he be his own Incarnation?
Not a Trinitarian I get confused about these things.

China might or might not attack us directly (who would stop them?), but would definitely use our self-imposed weakness to further their own expansionist agendas and extend their sphere of influence- especially among openly anti democratic regimes.

Russia is not in a position to go on a major offensive anytime soon, but Putin is still very butthurt about the fall of the Soviet Union and would use the US's weakness to ignore treaties as part of a renewed effort to rebuild their military, and use defense spending to stimulate the economy.

North Korea would use the US's withdrawl as an opportunity to try and intimidate South Korea and Japan, who are both close allies. North Korea would still not pose a direct threat to the US but would be belligerent to major trade partners.

Iran is the most unstable of those 4 countries. They intend to develop a highly sophisticated missile program by exchanging research data with North Korea, and a nuclear program as well. Without the US presence in Afghanistan there would be nothing blocking them from easy access to the world's richest lithium deposits and substantial amounts of cobalt. Lithium would enable Iran to turn the 125 kiloton maximum theoretical yield of a fission warhead that can fit on a missile into a 25 megaton warhead, and the cobalt could be used to render an area uninhabitable for a while. Iran has little inhibition to fight a nuclear war since by their logic, all Muslims that die in such a conflict would be martyrs. The most immediate threat from Iran is their financial and material support for terrorist groups- from providing rockets, explosives, and small arms to places like Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, to providing financial assistance for sleeper cells and suicide bombers. Terrorist literature written in Farsi periodically turns up in piles of abandoned gear along trails just inside the US southern border.

State sponsors of terrorism are the biggest threat right now. They have been warned that their governments will be responsible for any attacks they enabled and we need a huge military to back up our threat. The need for counter-terrorism operations all over the globe (often in places most people don't know where to find on a map) that no official will confirm nor deny, but we will always need a huge military so we can prevent future military or terrorist attacks by being capable and willing to rain hell on anyone that tries.

I forgot to mention Mexico. It's looking more and more like we are going to have to go down there and clean house one of these days. The Russians seem to have no concept of how to run a police action or a humanitarian mission, so maybe we should make a secret deal with them to join in so that we look even better and have fewer critics?

You say that like the US military has any idea how to run a humanitarian mission.

Except mexico is the way it is largely because of our interventions.

You really need to learn about making a play on words...



Is who I'm referring to.

I am not familiar with him is he on Fox news?
Still if he is a person how can I be his incarnation?
(even if you find I theological construct that makes this possible I am why better looking
so I doubt that I am him.)
But stick by you lame pun about an unknown person,
you would not want to lose that one.

Nope.



He worked at MSNBC till he finally went off the deep end even for them.

He is some guy who has a show on msnbc.

People who get all their political ideas from Fox News believe that all liberals do the same by watching MSNBC.

Like anyone would watch that third rate basic cable network.

He isn't on MSNBC anymore, he got fired.

I've got plenty of things to nail CNN as well. Fox News has more liberals on it, than CNN and MSNBC COMBINED have Conservatives.

Cool story bro.
not exactly in my circle.

How would i know that some guy i pay no attention to got fired from a network i never watch ?

I don't pay much attention to CNN either.

The closest thing to a political pundit i watch on TV is Jon Stewart.