Political Discussion

[tigergem]

I didn't watch the speech. I was afraid my President might embarrass himself and I didn't want to witness that. Besides that, I don't have cable - or a tv for that matter - because I am trying to meet a kinda tight budget. And I was kinda busy being "first". (nudge nudge, right jb? lol!)

I threw a lot of time and energy into supporting and promoting health care reform right here in my local Republican district. I took on my Congressman at one of those town hall meetings. And I would love nothing more than to see term limits on Congress, because that local good ol' boy needs to GO. If we had a Democrat even running against him in the local elections, I would throw time and energy into the campaign. But we don't. I even tried to get a guy I knew to run, and he nearly was going to... but then he suddenly up and moved out of the district.

But the truth of the matter is, I am motivated by an issue, not politics itself. Politically, I support he (or she) who supports an idea that I can support. Other than that, I am genuinely politically apathetic.

Because I am all into taking on things that I feel I actually can have some influence over. But waaaay too much goes on up there on the hill that only the players have influence over. And you and I can talk about it til we turn blue... ain't gonna change a thing.

[LimpDisc]

The sooner we hit rock bottom, the sooner we can start to rebuild.

[JRScott]

The sooner we hit rock bottom, the sooner we can start to rebuild.

I fully agree with this, which is why the stimulus and bank bailouts were stupid they just prolong the agony.

[JRScott]

Of course - and come on, you know this - the question here is whether an unborn fetus is considered "alive". That is the crux of the entire argument, and no, there is no obvious answer to this; it really does depend on one's point of view.

Thus your entire argument is based on a hidden assumption that is not necessarily one that would be adopted by the person you are arguing with. That makes the constitutional argument sort of pointless, dontcha think?

I tell you what go and watch an abortion in progress where you can see what the fetus is doing and tell me the fetus is not alive.

The fetus does its best to escape from death but of course is limited to its mother's womb which limits its ability to move and thus survive.

How do you feel about people being charged with multiple murders for killing a pregnant woman?

[JRScott]

onwards is right int he analysis that it comes down to framing just what defines life and whether an unborn person is actually, a life. They even through in "potential" life too. And the Constitution does guarantee life and the pursuit of it, so that's the argument.

If you think I'm wrong... just think back to slavery. The constitution, as posted shortly ago, reads that all mean are created equal. Yet, why did black men not have the same constitutional rights? Well, they figured that a black man wasn't a "real" man. He was only 3/5ths of a man. Therefore, the Constitutional protection didn't apply.

I mean, seriously, this is how our Constitution is sliced and diced and it will continue to happen. This is why I support statutes and laws that actual define the terms that they use, within the Statute. Otherwise, the Judges will continue to interpret the meaning, or parse the words and leave everyone guessing.

It was a compromise.

Frankly the Northern States were afraid if the south could count all the blacks as 1 full person that they'd be overwhelmed by the southern states (who were more populous if you counted all the slaves). It was not the slave states that argued to count the slaves as only 3/5ths of a man, it was the free states......

[OhioFiler]

I would agree with you OF that Obama does not have the experience to be president. I would not call his resume "blank" though. He was the first black to head the Harvard law review, he is a Harvard educated lawyer and professor, and he has as much experience as many people who get elected to the Senate. (although Scott Brown is undeniably sexy and gorgeous, I am not sure his resume as a nude Cosmo model and a state politician is any less "blank" than Obama's was when he was elected to the Senate.)

Obama's resume includes community agitating (all failures) and winning elections (yet voting merely "present" most often or off campaigning). He accomplished nothing that qualified him as president. Blacks voted for Obama because he is black. White liberals voted for him because he is black. The remainder of his votes were anti-Bush. NO ONE voted for him because of his talents.

How's that Hopeenchange working out for you?

I've been told Scott Brown looks like me!

[backtoschool]

LOL! Now BTS, you are too nice and wise to be a true Liberal. You know better. I enjoyed this post.

Let's face it, 'Bammy bit off more than he can chew. He reads speeches just fine. If you cannot see his agenda, total cradle to grave "help", commonly called Socialism, I would be surprised.

Please do not get me wrong here.....I am a registered Dem. I hated Bush except the necessary policy in the Afghanistan war. His attack on Iraq was simply to finish his father's Eff up. Another dope. BTW there were weapons of messy destruction. We just saw exicution of one who used them against his own nations people.

'Bammy is leading us not only into a Major Depression, but now that I hear the Chinese are pizzed orf about us selling Taiwan modern weapons the Chinese can take us down simply by calling their debt in. How did we break up USSR? We caused them to go bk. 'Hub

You are right 'Hub, I am not nearly as liberal as many of my friends. Many of my friends do not consider me a true liberal because I have somewhat conservative fiscal views. Actually, my views are very similar to the mayor of New York City's, Bloomberg's, and I am not sure how you would classify him.

I tend to define myself as a "liberal" on these threads just to counteract some of the ultra ultra conservative views that get posted. It is good to have balance, and I think that if these threads look too much like Rush Limbaugh's website, that a lot of interesting views will not get posted because people will write the thread off.

I agree with you that Obama does not understand the severity of the financial crisis, and is not doing what is necessary to fix it. Where I am skeptical, however, is that anyone could fix it right now. We are in quite a bind economically. If we raise interest rates to curb the inevitable hyper-inflation that is coming, then the economy will grind to a halt. But we cannot lower interest rates any further because they are essentially at zero now. Pumping money into government programs is only a temporary "solution" at best and will not solve the underlying weaknesses in the economy. The housing crisis is far far from over, and is about to spread into commercial real estate. I am not sure that there is a fix for any of this that will not put us into another Depression.

[backtoschool]

Obama's resume includes community agitating (all failures) and winning elections (yet voting merely "present" most often or off campaigning). He accomplished nothing that qualified him as president. Blacks voted for Obama because he is black. White liberals voted for him because he is black. The remainder of his votes were anti-Bush. NO ONE voted for him because of his talents.

How's that Hopeenchange working out for you?

I've been told Scott Brown looks like me!

As a white liberal woman, I voted for Obama for several reasons:

1. The fact that he was black made me feel that I was at least doing something historically and socially significant with my vote, even though I knew that he would not be a particularly effective president and would probably be much like Jimmy Carter.

2. The alternative was much worse.

3. Not voting is never an alternative for me (I always vote in national elections)

4. I hoped that he would pick a seasoned cabinet of advisors that would steer him in a productive direction.

Many politicians win elections due to Rhetoric, effective campaigning, and appealing to the idealism inherent in very young voters. Obama is no different.

And I am excited for you OF if you look like Scott Brown. You should have a great political career ahead of you as the next "independent" voice of Northern Ohio!

[onwards]

I tell you what go and watch an abortion in progress where you can see what the fetus is doing and tell me the fetus is not alive.

The fetus does its best to escape from death but of course is limited to its mother's womb which limits its ability to move and thus survive.

How do you feel about people being charged with multiple murders for killing a pregnant woman?

Unfortunately had to do that. Wasn't fun.

Regardless, the legal definition of "alive" in the US does not, at present, extend to an unborn fetus. On a personal level, I actually agree with this approach, and thus have no moral issue at all with abortions (regardless of the squeamishness). But then again, I also have no moral issues whatsoever with, say, genetic engineering of unborn children, cloning, the concept of technology-enhanced humans (cyborgs) and so on, and thus I'm really not in the mainstream at all. Again note that I am referring specifically to MORALITY, not anything else (like religion, or personal preference, etc).

As for your other question, I DO take issue with the multiple-murder concept, because it seems to contradict the notion that an unborn fetus is not alive. I am almost certain that at some point this issue will have to be raised to the supreme court, because these two LEGAL positions are difficult to reconcile. As for my PERSONAL viewpoint, I find it to be a populistic law and would rather see it discarded, perhaps replaced with mandatory minimum sentencing for this class of murder.

[OhioFiler]

You are right 'Hub, I am not nearly as liberal as many of my friends. Many of my friends do not consider me a true liberal because I have somewhat conservative fiscal views. Actually, my views are very similar to the mayor of New York City's, Bloomberg's, and I am not sure how you would classify him.

I tend to define myself as a "liberal" on these threads just to counteract some of the ultra ultra conservative views that get posted. It is good to have balance, and I think that if these threads look too much like Rush Limbaugh's website, that a lot of interesting views will not get posted because people will write the thread off.

I agree with you that Obama does not understand the severity of the financial crisis, and is not doing what is necessary to fix it. Where I am skeptical, however, is that anyone could fix it right now. We are in quite a bind economically. If we raise interest rates to curb the inevitable hyper-inflation that is coming, then the economy will grind to a halt. But we cannot lower interest rates any further because they are essentially at zero now. Pumping money into government programs is only a temporary "solution" at best and will not solve the underlying weaknesses in the economy. The housing crisis is far far from over, and is about to spread into commercial real estate. I am not sure that there is a fix for any of this that will not put us into another Depression.

America's anchorman is loved by most.

[OhioFiler]

You are right 'Hub, I am not nearly as liberal as many of my friends. Many of my friends do not consider me a true liberal because I have somewhat conservative fiscal views. Actually, my views are very similar to the mayor of New York City's, Bloomberg's, and I am not sure how you would classify him.

I tend to define myself as a "liberal" on these threads just to counteract some of the ultra ultra conservative views that get posted. It is good to have balance, and I think that if these threads look too much like Rush Limbaugh's website, that a lot of interesting views will not get posted because people will write the thread off.

I agree with you that Obama does not understand the severity of the financial crisis, and is not doing what is necessary to fix it. Where I am skeptical, however, is that anyone could fix it right now. We are in quite a bind economically. If we raise interest rates to curb the inevitable hyper-inflation that is coming, then the economy will grind to a halt. But we cannot lower interest rates any further because they are essentially at zero now. Pumping money into government programs is only a temporary "solution" at best and will not solve the underlying weaknesses in the economy. The housing crisis is far far from over, and is about to spread into commercial real estate. I am not sure that there is a fix for any of this that will not put us into another Depression.

Pumping money into government programs is DESTROYING our economy.

The solution: CUT TAXES for corporations AND individuals and CUT government spending.

[DiamondsR]

It seems to me that both liberals and conservatives are responsible for the mess that we're in. Conservatives and their "cut taxes" mantra (that inevitably puts more money in their friends' pockets) and liberals and their "pump money into government programs (that inevitably just go into their friends' pockets for pet projects). I see a pattern and we're niave if they think they really care All the while, trying to finance two wars (where do conservatives or liberals think the money for that is coming from while they are cutting taxes and printing money for government programs). So years of cutting taxes, we have no cushion to survive this and pumping money into social programs when we don't have the money to do it (and just printing up new money is just legal counterfeiting).
I've lived under a socialist government and calling Obama a socialist is a joke (he's not anywhere NEAR socialist. Wim Kok, now that was a socialist).
All of the programs Bammie proposes in the long run don't really help and he was truly niave if he thought he could have bi-partisanship. Will never happen (two parties do not a coalition government make. In the Dutch model, there are MANY parties so they have to make coalitions. Here, not so much). Nope, more money for people to "study problems" and paper pushers. He needs to concentrate on getting EVERYONE back to work (that includes - gasp - people who don't have university degrees. Upper, middle and lower class. Just upping food stamps for the lower class is their "bailout"? The lower classes need more than food! He's great for soundbits about the middle class and homeowners but what about renters? After so many homeowners become renters, what "plans" does he have to help?
Taxes are a necessary evil and we have to have some taxes so conservatives are really being childish but liberals are also equally childish with making monopoly money.

[LimpDisc]

Pumping money into government programs is DESTROYING our economy.

The solution: CUT TAXES for corporations AND individuals and CUT government spending.

"General Accountability Office study finds 68 percent of U.S. corporations do not pay any taxes at all"

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08957.pdf

Ohio, help me understand. Why do we need to cut corporate taxes if 68% of them pay no taxes?

[dakota112]

In my opinion taxes are just way too high. When they take 25% federal, SEP tax, state tax, city tax, sales tax, and on and on and the harder you decide to work the more they dig their hand in your pocket well I say enough is enough. On top of all this there are taxes on phones, gas, food beer, etc. I am going to scale way way back and can live quite comfortably on very little now. Let those who want to give away 50% of their sweat do so. Its a free country.

[backtoschool]

Pumping money into government programs is DESTROYING our economy.

The solution: CUT TAXES for corporations AND individuals and CUT government spending.

Cutting government spending is not going to grow the economy at this particular moment.

I agree with you though that cutting corporate taxes, will create jobs in the mid-term to long term, which will eventually grow the economy.

I am not sure how pumping money into government programs is "destroying' our economy OF. Banks are not lending to small businesses, companies are not hiring, and demand for goods and services is way down. Those factors, coupled with a spiraling housing crisis that is lowering the tax base of local communities, and tying up the capital reserves of banks, is what is destroying our economy at the moment.