[BartSimpson]

andyt wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

Can you point to one modern, successful society that still goes by that pre 30's model.

Considering that the US was the only country living by the US model prior to 1930 there would be no other country for me to identify.

andyt wrote:

And if one exists, would you want to live there?

Absolutely.

[N_Fiddledog]

This was inevitable, I guess.

Now the progressives want to start organizing "coffee parties".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

Question: Why is it when progressives talk about "democracy", what they mean is exclusively those times they have the majority. Polls show the American people are against the mega-bills, like the current Democratic Healthcare bills, and Cap n Tax, but that's not what they mean by democracy. They mean carte blanche for whatever Obama, Pelosi, and Reid can dream up, until 2010 to 2012 when they start to disappear, then "democracy" will mean something else.

[DerbyX]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

You heard what happened yesterday, right? Obama felt he did good at his previous Q&A with Republicans. So he held this Summit where he felt he could further marginalize Republican viewpoint. The problem was, this time the Republicans were ready for him, and they came to the summit prepared.

Turns out when the media is forced to give Republican ideas air time, these guys actually have ideas, and legitimate grievances. Previously we'd only heard them at tea parties, which means the larger public, relying on the MSM were not aware of them. Here's a sample of the sorts of things the tea party people talk about, the rest of America finally heard yesterday.

Funny thing about that is that is when people actually see for themselves what Obamas health plan entails they see its not far off from what either side has proposed and that the overbearing commie, socialist labels they shout at the Democrats is patently false.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Graphic ... rison.aspx

[N_Fiddledog]

And I simply reiterate...

[DerbyX]

So what? Its not as if any of them (or you) have even remotely listened to Obamas bill and instead want nothing more then to prevent it because it is a Democrat proposing it.

[N_Fiddledog]

DerbyX wrote:

So what?

So this... There are legitimate criticisms of the megabills. Ryan offered just a few.

Maggie Mertens tells you there is common ground between Dems and Repubs. Very well, why doesn't Obama stop, just paying lip service to the idea he wants to find it, and actually do what Ryan suggests? Start over, and this time, listen.

[DerbyX]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

So what?

So this... There are legitimate criticisms of the megabills. Ryan offered just a few.

Maggie Mertens tells you there is common ground between Dems and Repubs. Very well, why doesn't Obama stop, just paying lip service to the idea he wants to find it, and actually to what Ryan suggests? Start over, and this time, listen.

Why start over? He has a great plan and if it needs a few tweaks then he can do that. Its republican sour grapes is all.

What makes Ryan right and Obama wrong?

Oh, btw the public support thing you mentioned before (on another thread) and like to tout about proof over how wrong Obamas health care bill is.

Shall we compare public support over climate change since that is being used as evidence now?

[commanderkai]

andyt wrote:

They favor minimal govt for other people, but max govt for their own entitlements.

And such is the life of politics. Plus, I mentioned this with the pork barrel part.

Quote:

I don't see Republicons striving to end say agricultural subsidies.

And I don't see Democrats either. It's an easy pork barrel project to win rural voters across the United States, from cherry farmers in Michigan, orange grove owners in Florida, grain farmers in Nebraska, and every other state you can think of. Agricultural subsidies is just a part of the political system that exists today because, like I said, it's hard to get people off their addiction to government aid/money/bacon.

Quote:

As for your point B - that's summed up by "keep your government hands off my medicare." There is no real popular pressure to reduce spending, just to reduce it for the other guy. Preferably for all those welfare cheating black people. That's just a wet dream, there's little reality to it.

Hilariously enough, you proved my point B as well. EVEN IF Republicans attempted to cut social spending, no matter if it's welfare or agricultural subsidies, partisan and public outcry will be based on something like this:

"There is no real popular pressure to reduce spending, just to reduce it for the other guy. Preferably for all those welfare cheating black people."

So then brings up bullshit cries of racism and class warfare with those big, fatcat Republicans evil etc etc etc against the poor black person without any opportunity etc etc etc. You can basically fit that mould for any issue. Against agricultural subsidies? You hate farmers. Against medicare? You hate old people. Against military spending? You hate the military.

Guess what? Having your reputation tarnished by those smears, true or not, makes it difficult to be a politician.

Quote:

As you sum it up in point C - it's all about bringing home the bacon, but complaining about the other guy's bacon. Unless that changes (doubt it) small government will just be empty rhetoric to get votes from dumbasses.

Not always. There are some politicians who are against pork, but pork is very attractive for a politician. On top of that, calls to not enact new legislation, and increase the size of government is not empty rhetoric. Quite the opposite, really. As much as people like pork, they don't like taxes, and taxes are needed to fund major government expansions.

Quote:

I would love to see the Teabaggers assume power. (They'd better be quick about it, whitey don't have much time left). I could stand on my balcony, play my violin and watch the flames over the border. Unfortunately those flames wouldn't stop at the border. we'd crash and burn along with them.

Right....*rolls my eyes*. Let me guess, you think the Tea Partiers want some armed revolution to overthrow the government to install anarchy, or something? Save it for somebody who cares, like fellow lefties.

Quote:

As for point A - don't you hate those external events like the Iraq war driving up the deficit? Imagine how frugal GWB would have been if Saddam hadn't attacked the US with those WMDs.

Save your opinions for the Iraq War for somebody who cares as well. . There will always be external factors that affects spending. Conflict and disasters are a part of the planet we live on.

Quote:

Those tax laws - everybody talks about it, nobody does anything, except to shift the loopholes around. Govts aren't going to give up the ability to shape politics and economics with tax policy.

True, but that's the point. Politics is the big wall for any sort of reform. Pork and partisan rhetoric of the likes you've mentioned (and expressed) just keeps the system moving as it is. There won't be change without some change in attitudes, and I don't see that until countries start going bankrupt (Greece might be the first of many case studies)

[Mr_Canada]

As Jon Stewart said, the main issue is that everyone in American politics is pretty much retarded.

The only people who seem to have somewhat of a clue are the citizens forced to deal with this crap.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX wrote:

So what? Its not as if any of them (or you) have even remotely listened to Obamas bill and instead want nothing more then to prevent it because it is a Democrat proposing it.

Democrats do the same thing. Hell, the Democrats just renewed the Patriot Act after denouncing it the past few years. See, when it's their idea it's good.

The big things the GOP opposes in the health care bill are:

1. It provides full care to illegal aliens which will push up costs.
2. The taxation structure to support it forces the elderly onto it from private care, again increasing costs above what the plan proposes and reducing revenues below what the plan proposes.
3. The fact that care will be rationed no matter what other name the Democrats want to use for 'rationing'.
4. Republicans (mostly) just don't want another government bureaucracy.

[Mr_Canada]

Also, I think I should add, excellent cartoon.

[DerbyX]

BartSimpson wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

So what? Its not as if any of them (or you) have even remotely listened to Obamas bill and instead want nothing more then to prevent it because it is a Democrat proposing it.

Democrats do the same thing. Hell, the Democrats just renewed the Patriot Act after denouncing it the past few years. See, when it's their idea it's good.

The big things the GOP opposes in the health care bill are:

1. It provides full care to illegal aliens which will push up costs.
2. The taxation structure to support it forces the elderly onto it from private care, again increasing costs above what the plan proposes and reducing revenues below what the plan proposes.
3. The fact that care will be rationed no matter what other name the Democrats want to use for 'rationing'.
4. Republicans (mostly) just don't want another government bureaucracy.

yes they do. We do the same up here and it is done everywhere else in the world too.

Again, the plan is very similar to the one already proposed by the Rs with points they didn't find unpalatable then.

[Mr_Canada]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

until 2010 to 2012 when they start to disappear, then "democracy" will mean something else.

When even less progress will happen, hurrah.

[BartSimpson]

Come January 20, 2013 the polling (for now) indicates that there will be yet one more person on unemployment in Wash. DC. It's also looking like the Republicans will have majorities in both houses of Congress after this fall. What's crazy is that the Democrat push for this health care thing of theirs is going to cause their downfall.
The Dems made a mistake in strategy when they thought the coat-tail effect Obama had in Nov 2008 was a mandate. It wasn't. Now it seems they are too stupid to change course and let this issue die a quiet death. Instead they're making political hay for the Republicans.

[Psudo]

N_Fiddledog wrote:

there is common ground between Dems and Repubs. Very well, why doesn't Obama stop, just [find it?]

What if that common ground is increased government programs? Since McCain endorsed the 2008 bailout, that's stood out as their greatest common ground.