Any Moderates Post Here?

[takenflight]

Or is it only extreme left or extreme right wingers?

Personally I consider myself to be Center-Right...(socially liberal, fisacally conservative, but a little more regulatory beliefs than Libertarian)


For any Mods out there, I wanted to post these 2 links...

IN Rhode Island we are on the political map!

http://www.moderate-ri.org/

This website had some pretty interesting platform ideas...(Although I don't agree with the health care idea completely)

http://www.americanmoderatepoliticalparty. org/



Discuss...

[caveBEAR]

Or is it only extreme left or extreme right wingers?

Personally I consider myself to be Center-Right...(socially liberal, fisacally conservative, but a little more regulatory beliefs than Libertarian)


For any Mods out there, I wanted to post these 2 links...

IN Rhode Island we are on the political map!

http://www.moderate-ri.org/

This website had some pretty interesting platform ideas...(Although I don't agree with the health care idea completely)

http://www.americanmoderatepoliticalparty. org/



Discuss...

Nah dude, it's only extreme left-wingers on this board. You can't throw a stone without finding a topic filled with the psudeo-utopian ideals of Communist revolutionaries on this forum.

Watch out for that 16 year old; he's like a member of the Hitler Youth for Marxism.


:rolleyes:

[Machu505]

Nah dude, it's only extreme left-wingers on this board. You can't throw a stone without finding a topic filled with the psudeo-utopian ideals of Communist revolutionaries on this forum.

Watch out for that 16 year old; he's like a member of the Hitler Youth for Marxism.


:rolleyes:
Don't talk about me behind my back.

I don't have any personal problems with moderates or moderation, but the American political climate doesn't allow for it. Look at Obama. He passes some vaguely centre-left reforms and is called a socialist.

[caveBEAR]

Don't talk about me behind my back.

I don't have any personal problems with moderates or moderation, but the American political climate doesn't allow for it. Look at Obama. He passes some vaguely centre-left reforms and is called a socialist.

Psh, you love it when your earlobes tickle.


'Extreme left-wing' has become anyone who doesn't jack off to libertarian-conservative ideals, and 'moderate' has become someone who ascribes to the less batshit insane aspects of conservatism. The terms are laughable at this point.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Obama is turning into Bill Clinton... a Centrist. Conservatives decry "SOCIALIST!!!"... Liberals think he is not liberal enough. He's a moderate's dream.

Abortions for some... miniature American Flags for all of us!!!!!!!!

[takenflight]

Don't talk about me behind my back.

I don't have any personal problems with moderates or moderation, but the American political climate doesn't allow for it. Look at Obama. He passes some vaguely centre-left reforms and is called a socialist.

Hey dude, I'm not gonna pass judgement on you and am glad you posted, but to call Obama center anything is far from from the truth...He is the most liberal president in the history of the US and has advocated for the most givernment expansion ever. He does not appeal to Moderates.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Hey dude, I'm not gonna pass judgement on you and am glad you posted, but to call Obama center anything is far from from the truth...He is the most liberal president in the history of the US and has advocated for the most givernment expansion ever. He does not appeal to Moderates.

He's certainly expanded gun rights.

[Machu505]

Hey dude, I'm not gonna pass judgement on you and am glad you posted, but to call Obama center anything is far from from the truth...He is the most liberal president in the history of the US and has advocated for the most givernment expansion ever. He does not appeal to Moderates.
I don't understand this sentiment, to be honest. Adjusted for inflation (since it's unfair to compare past politics with present without accounting for ideological evolution), the likes of Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Lyndon B. Johnson made much more left-wing reforms than Obama has. HCR was generally common sense reforms and a bad Republican idea (individual mandate)
and the stimulus was no New Deal.

[takenflight]

Psh, you love it when your earlobes tickle.


'Extreme left-wing' has become anyone who doesn't jack off to libertarian-conservative ideals, and 'moderate' has become someone who ascribes to the less batshit insane aspects of conservatism. The terms are laughable at this point.

Ok here are my views...you guys can tell me if you consider these "moderate" or not...

Things I'd like to improve most in America:

1-Economy/Job creation
2-Military Strategy
3-A REAL soluton to fix the MINOR glitches in Health Care & Health Insurance industry
4-Immigration Reform
5-Government spending allocations
6-Tax System (How to reach the Fair Tax system over time)

How I would achieve these goals:

1-Big Tax cuts for major corporations...in return they provide jobs. Penalities imposed for hiring illegals on businesses. Hire American, we will finally make it affordable to do so. Its all about INCENTIVES!...NOT JOB DESTROYING NEW TAXES!

2-No more getting involved in affairs that don't pose a national security threat. No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB! We haven't heard a peep since! We did not need to occupy those countries either

3-Instead of compromosing care by overloading the system with patients & hiking premiums up for everyone else to pay for the ininsured, #1 is a good way to start extending coverage...more people back to work=more employer sponsored health benefits to the people who were out of work. Illegal immigrants would not matter, as they would no longer count towards the "uninsured" numbers. We would use the money we save on the war to open "free clinics" to uninsured who would have to qualify based on income...this would only be available to them if they were not able to enroll in state benefit plan or obtain help from a private clinic in their area. My point is we don't need to ruin 85 percent of the populations health insurance to appease the other 15%. There are much more cost effective & intelligent ways of doing this. Tort reform would also drive the costs down considerably & that would be implemented immediately. To prevent "overusage". of free clinics, you could be refused if you did not have a legitimate reason for being there, we don;t need people faking pain to score vikes on our tax dollars.

4-No more immigration until we have effectively balanced the budget, plain & simple. Penalities wuold apply to companies that would be caught hiring illegals

5-Foreign Aid=Done...not until we are out of debt and only if we beleive we will get the money back & it is in the interest of national security.

6-Over tyime, the reigninign in of government spending would make the fair tax system possible because we would not need to bleed our citizens dry to pay for these things anymore...It would take quite a while to achieve since we are so far in debt, but over time we would get there.

[Machu505]

He's certainly expanded gun rights.
Gun rights is such an imaginary left/right issue. I'm a leftist and support gun rights 100%.

[caveBEAR]

I don't understand this sentiment, to be honest. Adjusted for inflation (since it's unfair to compare past politics with present without accounting for ideological evolution), the likes of Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Lyndon B. Johnson made much more left-wing reforms than Obama has. HCR was generally common sense reforms and a bad Republican idea (individual mandate)
and the stimulus was no New Deal.

See? Marxist Youth!

[zion the lion]

Nah dude, it's only extreme left-wingers on this board. You can't throw a stone without finding a topic filled with the psudeo-utopian ideals of Communist revolutionaries on this forum.

Watch out for that 16 year old; he's like a member of the Hitler Youth for Marxism.


:rolleyes:

Shit he turned 16? He's growing up right before our eyes.

[caveBEAR]

2-No more getting involved in affairs that don't pose a national security threat. No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB! We haven't heard a peep since! We did not need to occupy those countries either

Moderate? :lol: More like 'lunatic', but sure, we can call it 'moderate' if you prefer.

EDIT: Oh, and there's 'big tax cuts for major corporations' in there, too. Color me 'shocked'. :rolleyes:

[takenflight]

The individual mandate was not a republican idea

[takenflight]

Moderate? :lol: More like 'lunatic', but sure, we can call it 'moderate' if you prefer.

So as commander in cheif of our armed forces Harry Truman was a lunatic for bombing Japan after they attacked the US?

And yes, major corporation provide jobs & benefits.

Tell me there isnt someone out there with a pre-exising health condition that wouldn't take an emplpyer group plan right now...Do you think small businesses can provide those kind of benefits? I know they usually can't.

[Machu505]

The individual mandate was not a republican idea
In the HCR debate of the 90s, it was the Republican response to the Democrats' employer mandate. Nothing liberal about funneling money to insurance companies.
For the record too, I don't think you're a lunatic; just someone I disagree with on certain issues.

[Scrandon]

Ok here are my views...you guys can tell me if you consider these "moderate" or not...

Things I'd like to improve most in America:

1-Economy/Job creation
2-Military Strategy
3-A REAL soluton to fix the MINOR glitches in Health Care & Health Insurance industry
4-Immigration Reform
5-Government spending allocations
6-Tax System (How to reach the Fair Tax system over time)

How I would achieve these goals:

1-Big Tax cuts for major corporations...in return they provide jobs. Penalities imposed for hiring illegals on businesses. Hire American, we will finally make it affordable to do so. Its all about INCENTIVES!...NOT JOB DESTROYING NEW TAXES!

2-No more getting involved in affairs that don't pose a national security threat. No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB! We haven't heard a peep since! We did not need to occupy those countries either

3-Instead of compromosing care by overloading the system with patients & hiking premiums up for everyone else to pay for the ininsured, #1 is a good way to start extending coverage...more people back to work=more employer sponsored health benefits to the people who were out of work. Illegal immigrants would not matter, as they would no longer count towards the "uninsured" numbers. We would use the money we save on the war to open "free clinics" to uninsured who would have to qualify based on income...this would only be available to them if they were not able to enroll in state benefit plan or obtain help from a private clinic in their area. My point is we don't need to ruin 85 percent of the populations health insurance to appease the other 15%. There are much more cost effective & intelligent ways of doing this. Tort reform would also drive the costs down considerably & that would be implemented immediately. To prevent "overusage". of free clinics, you could be refused if you did not have a legitimate reason for being there, we don;t need people faking pain to score vikes on our tax dollars.

4-No more immigration until we have effectively balanced the budget, plain & simple. Penalities wuold apply to companies that would be caught hiring illegals

5-Foreign Aid=Done...not until we are out of debt and only if we beleive we will get the money back & it is in the interest of national security.

6-Over tyime, the reigninign in of government spending would make the fair tax system possible because we would not need to bleed our citizens dry to pay for these things anymore...It would take quite a while to achieve since we are so far in debt, but over time we would get there.

These policies display absolutely no knowledge of real world economic principles.

[takenflight]

These policies display absolutely no knowledge of real world economic principles.

How do tax cuts not lead to job creation? You dno't create jobs by taxing big companies, you just create layoffs.

Have you worked in the real world?

[caveBEAR]

In the HCR debate of the 90s, it was the Republican response to the Democrats' employer mandate. Nothing liberal about funneling money to insurance companies.
For the record too, I don't think you're a lunatic; just someone I disagree with on certain issues.

Just for the record, I assign the term 'lunatic' to anyone who wants to 'drop the bomb' (I assume he means atomic/nuclear weaponry) in the year 2010. All the rest of his policies are just, as you said, things I don't agree with.


So as commander in cheif of our armed forces Harry Truman was a lunatic for bombing Japan after they attacked the US?

If you can't realize the difference between the Politics/ramifications of 'dropping the bomb' between 1945 and today...

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Gun rights is such an imaginary left/right issue. I'm a leftist and support gun rights 100%.

I've been on the fence regarding gun rights. As much as I oppose gun nuts like Ted Nugent, cities like Chicago and Washington D.C., where guns are limited, crime has exploded. Yet cities like Kennesaw, GA, where every resident is required to own a gun (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1818862/posts), crime has significantly declined.

[takenflight]

In the HCR debate of the 90s, it was the Republican response to the Democrats' employer mandate. Nothing liberal about funneling money to insurance companies.
For the record too, I don't think you're a lunatic; just someone I disagree with on certain issues.

Insurance cmpanies would not make money by having to accept people with pre-existing conditions who would jump on the plan for 1 month, get a $50,000 operation and then disenroll and take the penalty instead of paying their yearly premiums. Throw in the next taxes on insurance companies and they would have problems paying claims...this wuold just lead to the collapse of the private sector, which is what the Obama adminstration IMHO seems to be wanting so badly.

[takenflight]

Just for the record, I assign the term 'lunatic' to anyone who wants to 'drop the bomb' (I assume he means atomic/nuclear weaponry) in the year 2010. All the rest of his policies are just, as you said, things I don't agree with.




If you can't realize the difference between the Politics/ramifications of 'dropping the bomb' between 1945 and today...

I also refered to Kosovo...which was strategic air bombing...I don't advocate nuclear warfar, thats just dumb...

[Machu505]

Insurance cmpanies would not make money by having to accept people with pre-existing conditions who would jump on the plan for 1 month, get a $50,000 operation and then disenroll and take the penalty instead of paying their yearly premiums. Throw in the next taxes on insurance companies and they would have problems paying claims...this wuold just lead to the collapse of the private sector, which is what the Obama adminstration IMHO seems to be wanting so badly.
People won't be disenrolling much, seeing as they're now required by law to be enrolled. Look, I don't think the individual mandate is a bad idea too. An employer mandate+public option would yield better results
, like it has in San Francisco. I'd link you an article, but I'm posting via phone.

[caveBEAR]

I also refered to Kosovo...which was strategic air bombing...I don't advocate nuclear warfar, thats just dumb...

You also refered to Japan, as in atomic warfare. A strategic air bombing and 'dropping the bomb' (in the context that phrase entails) would create entirely different ramifications.

[Scrandon]

How do tax cuts not lead to job creation? You dno't create jobs by taxing big companies, you just create layoffs.
The problem is that there is too little demand for the goods/ services that these corporations produce. Tax cuts for corporations does very little to stimulate aggregate demand, because you are giving money to people who don't need it.

Aid to those who have been most harmed by the recession will be more productive in stimulating demand, because when someone who is desperate for money receives it, they are more likely to spend it.

This was just posted in the General Politics Thread.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/06/bang_for_the_buck_for_various_stimu lus_methods_%28LARGE%29-thumb-454x321-21273.png
Pay close attention to the return on something like unemployment benefits as compared with your corporate tax cuts.
The unemployment benefits stimulate demand (GDP) much more that the tax cuts.


Have you worked in the real world?
Yes, I work place where the owner of the store keeps all of the profit and not a damn thing 'trickles down'.

[takenflight]

People won't be disenrolling much, seeing as they're now required by law to be enrolled. Look, I don't think the individual mandate is a bad idea too. An employer mandate+public option would yield better results
, like it has in San Francisco. I'd link you an article, but I'm posting via phone.


As long as the employer mandate included tax breaks for the mployer who is providing insurance. This would guarantee the government would not carry the entire load in some sort of "public option". I think if there is any public option it should only be availbel if you cannot get anything else...not open to enrollment for everyone....

IN Wisconsin we have a program called "HIRSP" it is the "public option" if you will for people who can't get private coverage...So there is not a need for a federal publioc option here, as it is just a duplicate option which is already provided by the state.

This is why I think "free clinics" are a better idea than a federal public option, but I guess that would up for debate.

[takenflight]

You also refered to Japan, as in atomic warfare. A strategic air bombing and 'dropping the bomb' (in the context that phrase entails) would create entirely different ramifications.


Ok...Strategic airbombing...my point is, that is what works...quick effective and to the point...not pussyfooting around for 10 years "occupying" countries and not getting anything done & wasting tax payer money.

[takenflight]

The problem is that there is too little demand for the goods/ services that these corporations produce. Tax cuts for corporations does very little to stimulate aggregate demand, because you are giving money to people who don't need it.

Aid to those who have been most harmed by the recession will be more productive in stimulating demand, because when someone who is desperate for money receives it, they are more likely to spend it.

This was just posted in the General Politics Thread.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/06/bang_for_the_buck_for_various_stimu lus_methods_%28LARGE%29-thumb-454x321-21273.png
Pay close attention to the return on something like unemployment benefits as compared with your corporate tax cuts.
The unemployment benefits stimulate demand (GDP) much more that the tax cuts.


Yes, I work place where the owner of the store keeps all of the profit and not a damn thing 'trickles down'.

I guess I forgot to mention that this would be a CONDITIONAL tax cut....(ie, not tax cut if profits are not shared with employees through improved benefits or higher pay or emmployee stock purchase options)

[Scrandon]

I guess I forgot to mention that this would be a CONDITIONAL tax cut....(ie, not tax cut if profits are not shared with employees through improved benefits or higher pay or emmployee stock purchase options)

I'd rather discuss this with you sometime when you're not having three simultaneous discussions and giving everyone half-assed answers.

[takenflight]

I'm trying to cover alot of ground at once...my bad...But yeah, I'd like to continue this discussion as well

[Scrandon]

I guess I forgot to mention that this would be a CONDITIONAL tax cut....(ie, not tax cut if profits are not shared with employees through improved benefits or higher pay or emmployee stock purchase options)

This is basically the government telling a business how to operate, and you find this to be less intrusive than what the Democrats are doing right now? This is essentially funding a company, and then telling it how to spend it's profits, or nationalization.

Even if you imagined up the best tax cut available, that graph still points to five ways in which the money could be more productively spent to stimulate demand.

[takenflight]

I wouldn't tell them directly how to spend their money, but if they did not share profits, then they would not get the tax cut. I think I'd get their cooperation fairly quickly....Wouldn't they want the extra cash?

I would make it so they still made a proft even after sharing benefits/funds. This would mostly be to cure the health insurance problem & unemployment rate. I am not saying that they need to start paying top dollar to employees. I'd just be trying to motivate them to provide health insurance so the government doesn't have to (much like Medicare Advantage works only I'm not paying them, I'm just not taxing them as much)

I'd also be providing incentives not to outsource. Outsourcing is the direct result of overtaxation & greed. Greed is human nature, but if it becomes cheaper to hire Americans than to pay fines for hiring overseas than thats a good greed in the name of domestic job creation

I want to creat an environment where businesses thrive by hiring Americans. Will it be easy? No, but nobody has even come close to even trying to go in this direction, and the Obama administration has it all backwards & that is yielding historically terrible results, so I don't see how this would possibly be any worse.

[asmolitor]

Ok here are my views...you guys can tell me if you consider these "moderate" or not...

1-Big Tax cuts for major corporations...NOT JOB DESTROYING NEW TAXES!

2- No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB!

3- My point is we don't need to ruin 85 percent of the populations health insurance to appease the other 15%. There are much more cost effective & intelligent ways of doing this. Tort reform would also drive the costs down considerably & that would be implemented immediately. To prevent "overusage". of free clinics, you could be refused if you did not have a legitimate reason for being there, we don;t need people faking pain to score vikes on our tax dollars.

4-No more immigration until we have effectively balanced the budget, plain & simple. Penalities wuold apply to companies that would be caught hiring illegals

5-Foreign Aid=Done...not until we are out of debt and only if we beleive we will get the money back & it is in the interest of national security.

6-Over tyime, the reigninign in of government spending would make the fair tax system possible because we would not need to bleed our citizens dry to pay for these things anymore...It would take quite a while to achieve since we are so far in debt, but over time we would get there.

i have absolutely no idea why you have the slightest hint that these views would be considered moderate. and not only that, why these views are even, well, rational. they're essentially woefully misguided at best.

I want to creat an environment where businesses thrive by hiring Americans. Will it be easy? No, but nobody has even come close to even trying to go in this direction, and the Obama administration has it all backwards & that is yielding historically terrible results, so I don't see how this would possibly be any worse.

yep, in the 234 year history of the united states, barry's managed to completely unravel it in just short of 2.

IN Wisconsin we have a program called "HIRSP" it is the "public option" if you will for people who can't get private coverage...So there is not a need for a federal publioc option here, as it is just a duplicate option which is already provided by the state.

no. badgercare is the "public option," and up until recently the waitlist to get into the program was suspended because all the available slots had been filled. meaning that the impossibility of being accepted into the program forced numerous state residents to forego coverage. HIRSP is solely for those who literally cannot be covered in any cost-feasible way, for example HIV positive residents. even then, HIRSP mandates that member premiums account for no less than 60% of the plan cost - essentially meaning that the pricing of the plan is similar to fairly high rates found in the individual market. to say that there is no need for a federal public option here, or in practically any state for that matter, is reckless. /out-badgered

[Scrandon]

I wouldn't tell them directly how to spend their money, but if they did not share profits, then they would not get the tax cut. I think I'd get their cooperation fairly quickly....Wouldn't they want the extra cash?

I would make it so they still made a proft even after sharing benefits/funds. This would mostly be to cure the health insurance problem & unemployment rate. I am not saying that they need to start paying top dollar to employees. I'd just be trying to motivate them to provide health insurance so the government doesn't have to (much like Medicare Advantage works only I'm not paying them, I'm just not taxing them as much)

I'd also be providing incentives not to outsource. Outsourcing is the direct result of overtaxation & greed. Greed is human nature, but if it becomes cheaper to hire Americans than to pay fines for hiring overseas than thats a good greed in the name of domestic job creation

I want to creat an environment where businesses thrive by hiring Americans. Will it be easy? No, but nobody has even come close to even trying to go in this direction, and the Obama administration has it all backwards & that is yielding historically terrible results, so I don't see how this would possibly be any worse.

Why do you continue to harp on the tax cuts talking point, even though more effective means of stimulating the economy have been demonstrated?

Such as:
Aid to unemployed -> Unemployed buy necessities, or "increase demand" -> Companies hire to satisfy increased demand.

[takenflight]

i have absolutely no idea why you have the slightest hint that these views would be considered moderate. and not only that, why these views are even, well, rational. they're essentially woefully misguided at best.



no. badgercare is the "public option," and up until recently the waitlist to get into the program was suspended because all the available slots had been filled. meaning that the impossibility of being accepted into the program forced numerous state residents to forego coverage. HIRSP is solely for those who literally cannot be covered in any cost-feasible way, for example HIV positive residents. even then, HIRSP mandates that member premiums account for no less than 60% of the plan cost - essentially meaning that the pricing of the plan is similar to fairly high rates found in the individual market. to say that there is no need for a federal public option here, or in practically any state for that matter, is reckless. /out-badgered

Buddy...the 15 percent of the people polled who were unhappy with their nisurance when the healthcare debate was going on, WERE the people who had pre-existing conditions. I am licensed insurance agant in the state of Wisconsin, I don't think you wanna tangle with me on this one.

A public option WOULD NOT decrease costs. Insurance companies would RAISE rates as high as possible for EVERYONE until 2014 ENSURING their bottom line & then TAXPAYERS would FUND THE SUBSIDIES FOR THOSE FEW WHO WOULD QUALIFY FOR THEM WHO ALREADY RECEIVE MEDICAID.

there is no excuse to not fork over the money for HIRSP if thats all you can get. If you need an operation its gonna save you money. HIRSP was not created to go to the doctor everytime you have a freakin hangnail...

[takenflight]

Why do you continue to harp on the tax cuts talking point, even though more effective means of stimulating the economy have been demonstrated?

Such as:
Aid to unemployed -> Unemployed buy necessities, or "increase demand" -> Companies hire to satisfy increased demand.

When I was on unemployment I made 1/3 of my original salary...I wasn't buying shit,lol...I was borrowing money from my dad to pay rent.

That wouldn;t do dick to stimulate the ecomony

[Scrandon]

When I was on unemployment I made 1/3 of my original salary...I wasn't buying shit,lol...I was borrowing money from my dad to pay rent.

That wouldn;t do dick to stimulate the ecomony

First, you received an amount of money that was strictly greater than zero.

Second, I would then argue that unemployment benefits need to be extended. (Even though I hate to see them abused, they have, nonetheless, proven to be an effective stimulant.)

[Scrandon]

That wouldn;t do dick to stimulate the ecomony

Holy Crap! I missed this part all together at first! That's funny man!

I went through the time to provide logic and examples and reasoning and charts, I didn't know we could just say that it wouldn't do dick!

My rebuttal to your tax cuts talking point: It wouldn't do dick, bro.

Try providing me with evidence.

[asmolitor]

Buddy...the 15 percent of the people polled who were unhappy with their nisurance when the healthcare debate was going on, WERE the people who had pre-existing conditions. I am licensed insurance agant in the state of Wisconsin, I don't think you wanna tangle with me on this one.

A public option WOULD NOT decrease costs. Insurance companies would RAISE rates as high as possible for EVERYONE until 2014 ENSURING their bottom line & then TAXPAYERS would FUND THE SUBSIDIES FOR THOSE FEW WHO WOULD QUALIFY FOR THEM WHO ALREADY RECEIVE MEDICAID.

there is no excuse to not fork over the money for HIRSP if thats all you can get. If you need an operation its gonna save you money. HIRSP was not created to go to the doctor everytime you have a freakin hangnail...

i'm licensed too, champ, rendering your pseudo "moderate" gamesmanship irrelevant.

and someone who has a cursory understanding of economics would realize that marginalizing the argument of cost as to how insurance companies would be burdened, is ignorant at best.

as far as HIRSP goes, it's not a matter of obtaining coverage. it's a matter of those at the lower end of the income scale being unable to afford premiums. it's a complete bastardization of the argument to assume that the demographic we're talking about are well-off HIV patients who simply don't feel like paying premiums.

[Scrandon]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/change_in_federal_deficit%2C_2009-2017.png
Another chart, straight out of the General Thread.

Look how much your tax cuts destroy the budget, as compared with extending unemployment benefits. Not to mention they are much more efficient.

[asmolitor]

First, you received an amount of money that was strictly greater than zero.

Second, I would then argue that unemployment benefits need to be extended. (Even though I hate to see them abused, they have, nonetheless, proven to be an effective stimulant.)

it's almost as if unemployment benefits are intentionally lower than a comfortable standard of living, forcing money to be spent on basic necessities and circulated in the economy rather than saved!

[Scrandon]

it's almost as if unemployment benefits are intentionally lower than a comfortable standard of living, forcing money to be spent on basic necessities and circulated in the economy rather than saved!

Thank you!

[caveBEAR]

Psh, you guys are crazy. We need to give tax cuts to the big corporations. The extra money flow for them will create more jobs and better wages! After all, we all know how frugal and honest corporations and their CEOs are with extra money, particularly that provided by us. Remember how none of those corporations used bailout/stimulus money for raises and bonuses?

Oh, right...

[takenflight]

Who is going to pay for these benefits you guys speak of? Where is the money coming from?

MORE NEX TAXES?! LOL

[Scrandon]

Who is going to pay for these benefits you guys speak of? Where is the money coming from?

MORE NEX TAXES?! LOL

I just posted a chart showing that they are not even 1/5 the cost of your corporate tax cuts. Read the fucking chart. LOL

[Scrandon]

You'd think posting a chart would actually make someone more likely to read something than if it was just typed out in a post. So much for going the extra mile...

[Scrandon]

Psh, you guys are crazy. We need to give tax cuts to the big corporations. The extra money flow for them will create more jobs and better wages! After all, we all know how frugal and honest corporations and their CEOs are with extra money, particularly that provided by us. Remember how none of those corporations used bailout/stimulus money for raises and bonuses?

Oh, right...

No but see, we just didn't give them enough. We need to just continue to throw cash on their doorstep and hope that eventually they will fix everything, ignoring all evidence to the contrary on the way.

[asmolitor]

You'd think posting a chart would actually make someone more likely to read something than if it was just typed out in a post. So much for going the extra mile...

must not have been shiny enough, haha.

[Scrandon]

I like how this guy completely degenerated from a decently thought out argument to MORE TAXES LOLWUT?! in less than one page.

[takenflight]

I like how this guy completely degenerated from a decently thought out argument to MORE TAXES LOLWUT?! in less than one page.


Unemployment benefits are not the long term answer to job creation os stimulating the economy, the chart does not indicate otherwise.

[Scrandon]

Unemployment benefits are not the long term answer to job creation os stimulating the economy, the chart does not indicate otherwise.

Why? Because the word 'long-term' is not written on the chart? My point has been clearly demonstrated and backed with the use of multiple charts.

You have provided no evidence.

[EndHasAStart]

Ok here are my views...you guys can tell me if you consider these "moderate" or not...

Things I'd like to improve most in America:

1-Economy/Job creation
2-Military Strategy
3-A REAL soluton to fix the MINOR glitches in Health Care & Health Insurance industry
4-Immigration Reform
5-Government spending allocations
6-Tax System (How to reach the Fair Tax system over time)

How I would achieve these goals:

1-Big Tax cuts for major corporations...in return they provide jobs. Penalities imposed for hiring illegals on businesses. Hire American, we will finally make it affordable to do so. Its all about INCENTIVES!...NOT JOB DESTROYING NEW TAXES!

2-No more getting involved in affairs that don't pose a national security threat. No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB! We haven't heard a peep since! We did not need to occupy those countries either

3-Instead of compromosing care by overloading the system with patients & hiking premiums up for everyone else to pay for the ininsured, #1 is a good way to start extending coverage...more people back to work=more employer sponsored health benefits to the people who were out of work. Illegal immigrants would not matter, as they would no longer count towards the "uninsured" numbers. We would use the money we save on the war to open "free clinics" to uninsured who would have to qualify based on income...this would only be available to them if they were not able to enroll in state benefit plan or obtain help from a private clinic in their area. My point is we don't need to ruin 85 percent of the populations health insurance to appease the other 15%. There are much more cost effective & intelligent ways of doing this. Tort reform would also drive the costs down considerably & that would be implemented immediately. To prevent "overusage". of free clinics, you could be refused if you did not have a legitimate reason for being there, we don;t need people faking pain to score vikes on our tax dollars.

4-No more immigration until we have effectively balanced the budget, plain & simple. Penalities wuold apply to companies that would be caught hiring illegals

5-Foreign Aid=Done...not until we are out of debt and only if we beleive we will get the money back & it is in the interest of national security.

6-Over tyime, the reigninign in of government spending would make the fair tax system possible because we would not need to bleed our citizens dry to pay for these things anymore...It would take quite a while to achieve since we are so far in debt, but over time we would get there.

There is no way in hell you're a moderate. If you are, this just confirms the fact that the whole of American politics is shifted to the right relative to British politics.

I'd align myself most closely with the Conservative Party, which, in Britain, is the main centre-right party. But definitely more centre than right in its current form. Small government, extensive use of the private and voluntary sectors while keeping healthcare free at the point of use, low taxation for SMALL businesses, generally lower direct taxation and support for civil liberties.

In comparison, the policies you mention above are not moderate, but right-wing. No more immigration? No economic perspective could be used to justify this. Those sort of policy ideas nearly always have racist undertones. If immigrants are taking 'American' jobs, maybe the American workforce in question should get its butt into gear, drop the pride and be prepared to work crappy jobs at the market rate. Most of the people in Britain who advocate a halt to immigration are unemployed, yet unprepared to do the work that is available and underqualified to do the jobs that they feel entitled to. If an immigrant can do it better, let them do it. Then sort out welfare and education policy to get the population more competitive and back to work.

Re healthcare: while I normally advocate some sort of market solution to economic issues, I don't believe that anyone is less entitled to care than anyone else, no matter how little they've worked or earned. I think that smokers, for example, should pay for care they receive related to, say, lung cancer, but wealth should not play a part in keeping someone alive in most cases. In Britain we have free healthcare for all, with the private sector providing for those who want to use it.

Re tax cuts: for large corporations? Yes tax levels for large corporations need to be at an internationally competitive rates, but sustainable growth depends on small businesses. Tax cuts for large corporations will not lead to extensive job creation, when, by definition, corporations that are consistently of a large scale will be in profit and will not hire staff simply according to the rate at which they are taxed for doing so. A change in the tax rates for small businesses, on the other hand, may be the difference between an entrepreneur starting a business which employs twenty people, and not doing so.

Re invasions: yeh, restrict the military to self-defense or the defense of allies according to international agreements, but stop the patriotic bullshit that American governments are so full of. A country should simply be a border within which economic activity can be managed and encouraged, in order that its citizens can live well at minimal cost to the rest of the world. America is not some global police force. And I seriously hope you're joking about the bomb.

Re foreign aid: while 'aid' in many of its current forms does not create sustainable growth in poorer countries, sensible aid packages, such as results-based aid and long-term foreign investment, can only be a good thing. However much Western countries' economies are suffering, we are a lot better off than the rest of the world. The aid budget is usually a tiny proportion of government spending - hardly enough to adversely affect the domestic economy - so if you have any sense of morality, you would be in favour of its continuation, rather than passing that money to tax cuts for big business.

In general, I believe that small government is a good thing. The private sector can often provide a better service at a lower cost. And government spending, in Britain at least, is bloated. People are used to receiving so much from the government that its keeping people out of work and choking the private sector. On that I agree with you. But seriously dude, you are not a moderate.

[yves.]

That takenflight person is an idiot.

I think it's extremely difficult to have (real) moderate views in a country where a majority of the population doesn't know the meaning of moderation.

[pennie]

I love reading the politics forum.Hours of entertainment.You're all aces in my book

[spiffa0]

I love charts. A chart can make you understand something in five seconds whereas someone posting a four paragraph convoluted explanation of something they don't really understand makes you put a gun to your head and pull the trigger.

People should also use bullet points if they feel like explaining something.

[Scrandon]

Re-reading the OP, your whole "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" bit seems to be quite the paradox. How can you be socially liberal when your hangups about the budget would motivate you to:

1. Drop the bomb to save money.
2. Stop all immigration to save money.
3. Stop foreign aid to save money.
4. Ignore healthcare reform to save money.

None of these are socially liberal policies.

[EchoPark]

As I proud survivor of a botched abortion attempt, I strongly feel that the fiscally conservative sad sacks need to ante up and say:

"Mr Obama, we support your plan to give Federal funding to abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood"

Glenn Beck is ashamed of you lukewarm moderates and you certainly won't be getting a Beck e-Christmas Card. With eggs and bacon, the pig is fully committed to the cause, Well Mr.Beck wants you to be that pig.

[fightoffyrdmns]

Why do people still insist on trusting corporations with money? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....

[loveisdead]

I moderate.

[EndHasAStart]

I moderate.

This.

[loveisdead]

Didn't you make a thread about this a month ago? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=1747982&highlight=moderate)

[rhinitus]

He's certainly expanded gun rights.

What does that even mean? That he is upholding the Constitution? If you're crazy liberal are you not a fan of the Constitution? I should have started talking about politics later in life...I'm already burned out. It's such a chore.

[rhinitus]

Didn't you make a thread about this a month ago? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=1747982&highlight=moderate)

ha. served.

[jwicklun]

Because dropping the bomb is an absolute moderate decision.

[caveBEAR]

Because dropping the bomb is an absolute moderate decision.

Psh, you weren't listening. He doesn't just want to drop the bomb...he'd also accept a strategic missile strike!

[jwicklun]

Psh, you weren't listening. He doesn't just want to drop the bomb...he'd also accept a strategic missile strike!

That never fails and backfires! Genius!

[new_arbiter]

Didn't you make a thread about this a month ago? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=1747982&highlight=moderate)

At least the website doesn't look like complete shit this time.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

What does that even mean? That he is upholding the Constitution? If you're crazy liberal are you not a fan of the Constitution? I should have started talking about politics later in life...I'm already burned out. It's such a chore.

Many gun owners started stocking up on guns and ammo when he assumed the presidency because they thought he was going to take away their gun rights but he has since expanded them

[Scrandon]

Didn't you make a thread about this a month ago? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=1747982&highlight=moderate)

Haha, I knew I remembered that website, just wan't sure that it was the same user

[Debut_Fin]

Re-reading the OP, your whole "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" bit seems to be quite the paradox. How can you be socially liberal when your hangups about the budget would motivate you to:

1. Drop the bomb to save money.
2. Stop all immigration to save money.
3. Stop foreign aid to save money.
4. Ignore healthcare reform to save money.

None of these are socially liberal policies.

thank you. i hate it when people say that they are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. there are so many hypocrisies in the ideals

[caveBEAR]

thank you. i hate it when people say that they are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. there are so many hypocrisies in the ideals

How else can someone say 'I'm not racist, but I think we should stop welfare'?

[Debut_Fin]

How else can someone say 'I'm not racist, but I think we should stop welfare'?

Someone I went to school with claimed that she was socially liberal and fiscally conservative and when i asked her what she meant by that she basically said she was a republican who wasn't against gay marriage and that's as far as her explanation went

[caveBEAR]

Someone I went to school with claimed that she was socially liberal and fiscally conservative and when i asked her what she meant by that she basically said she was a republican who wasn't against gay marriage and that's as far as her explanation went

I think anyone who says 'I'm socially liberal but fiscally conservative', yet can't pin a real 'label' to their beliefs besides that half-assed description doesn't know enough about the issues to really have input anyway.

See; takenflight's threads/post on moderates.

[GeeBee]

Someone I went to school with claimed that she was socially liberal and fiscally conservative and when i asked her what she meant by that she basically said she was a republican who wasn't against gay marriage and that's as far as her explanation went

I laughed hard at this. I know so many poli-sci majors who can't elaborate on their positions beyond this level.

[xlife2lifelessx]

Gun rights is such an imaginary left/right issue. I'm a leftist and support gun rights 100%.

AMEN!

[rhinitus]

I think anyone who says 'I'm socially liberal but fiscally conservative', yet can't pin a real 'label' to their beliefs besides that half-assed description doesn't know enough about the issues to really have input anyway.

See; takenflight's threads/post on moderates.

and yet this whole thread talks about how labels aren't accurate in general and that they're stupid?

[rhinitus]

How else can someone say 'I'm not racist, but I think we should stop welfare'?

by saying the government shouldn't be able to take money i earned and spend it recklessly however they so choose

[Theseventhson]

Glad to see takenflight has gotten new material.

[x togepi x]

moderates are boring and wrong on every issue whatsoever.

[caveBEAR]

and yet this whole thread talks about how labels aren't accurate in general and that they're stupid?

I don't feel labels are stupid. People who live and die by their labels are usually moronic, but if you can't shoehorn your beliefs into some already established school of thought, your beliefs are probably either scattershot and hypocritical or entirely unformed, such as people referring to themselves as moderates when they mean, 'I'm a Republican who doesn't oppose gay marriage'.

by saying the government shouldn't be able to take money i earned and spend it recklessly however they so choose

Yeah dude, trying to help out the less fortunate is so unbelievably reckless and selfish. If you're really concerned about your money being 'stolen', why not crow about the top earners getting tax cuts? If they didn't get tax cuts, there'd be less of a deficit, so there'd be more money to go around, so...TA-DA!...there'd be less of 'your' money needed for (reckless :rolleyes:) programs like welfare.

[Love As Arson]

Moderates = right-wing populists

[Zeran]

Psh, you love it when your earlobes tickle.


'Extreme left-wing' has become anyone who doesn't jack off to libertarian-conservative ideals, and 'moderate' has become someone who ascribes to the less batshit insane aspects of conservatism. The terms are laughable at this point.
i agree. american political landscape is so shifted towards the right, it's insane.
Hey dude, I'm not gonna pass judgement on you and am glad you posted, but to call Obama center anything is far from from the truth...He is the most liberal president in the history of the US and has advocated for the most givernment expansion ever. He does not appeal to Moderates.
really? fdr created social insurance.
Ok here are my views...you guys can tell me if you consider these "moderate" or not...

Things I'd like to improve most in America:

1-Economy/Job creation
2-Military Strategy
3-A REAL soluton to fix the MINOR glitches in Health Care & Health Insurance industry
4-Immigration Reform
5-Government spending allocations
6-Tax System (How to reach the Fair Tax system over time)

How I would achieve these goals:

1-Big Tax cuts for major corporations...in return they provide jobs. Penalities imposed for hiring illegals on businesses. Hire American, we will finally make it affordable to do so. Its all about INCENTIVES!...NOT JOB DESTROYING NEW TAXES!

2-No more getting involved in affairs that don't pose a national security threat. No more "occupations" of countires that do pose a threat...they would be dealth with the same way we dealt with Japan & Kosovo...DROP THE BOMB! We haven't heard a peep since! We did not need to occupy those countries either

3-Instead of compromosing care by overloading the system with patients & hiking premiums up for everyone else to pay for the ininsured, #1 is a good way to start extending coverage...more people back to work=more employer sponsored health benefits to the people who were out of work. Illegal immigrants would not matter, as they would no longer count towards the "uninsured" numbers. We would use the money we save on the war to open "free clinics" to uninsured who would have to qualify based on income...this would only be available to them if they were not able to enroll in state benefit plan or obtain help from a private clinic in their area. My point is we don't need to ruin 85 percent of the populations health insurance to appease the other 15%. There are much more cost effective & intelligent ways of doing this. Tort reform would also drive the costs down considerably & that would be implemented immediately. To prevent "overusage". of free clinics, you could be refused if you did not have a legitimate reason for being there, we don;t need people faking pain to score vikes on our tax dollars.

4-No more immigration until we have effectively balanced the budget, plain & simple. Penalities wuold apply to companies that would be caught hiring illegals

5-Foreign Aid=Done...not until we are out of debt and only if we beleive we will get the money back & it is in the interest of national security.

6-Over tyime, the reigninign in of government spending would make the fair tax system possible because we would not need to bleed our citizens dry to pay for these things anymore...It would take quite a while to achieve since we are so far in debt, but over time we would get there.
you are not a moderate, by any stretch.
Gun rights is such an imaginary left/right issue. I'm a leftist and support gun rights 100%.
can you explain why, exactly?
I've been on the fence regarding gun rights. As much as I oppose gun nuts like Ted Nugent, cities like Chicago and Washington D.C., where guns are limited, crime has exploded. Yet cities like Kennesaw, GA, where every resident is required to own a gun (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1818862/posts), crime has significantly declined.
that's pretty interesting, didn't know that.
I wouldn't tell them directly how to spend their money, but if they did not share profits, then they would not get the tax cut. I think I'd get their cooperation fairly quickly....Wouldn't they want the extra cash?

I would make it so they still made a proft even after sharing benefits/funds. This would mostly be to cure the health insurance problem & unemployment rate. I am not saying that they need to start paying top dollar to employees. I'd just be trying to motivate them to provide health insurance so the government doesn't have to (much like Medicare Advantage works only I'm not paying them, I'm just not taxing them as much)

I'd also be providing incentives not to outsource. Outsourcing is the direct result of overtaxation & greed. Greed is human nature, but if it becomes cheaper to hire Americans than to pay fines for hiring overseas than thats a good greed in the name of domestic job creation

I want to creat an environment where businesses thrive by hiring Americans. Will it be easy? No, but nobody has even come close to even trying to go in this direction, and the Obama administration has it all backwards & that is yielding historically terrible results, so I don't see how this would possibly be any worse.
what makes you think corporations wouldn't just hold on to the extra money they'd get from such tax cuts?
Holy Crap! I missed this part all together at first! That's funny man!

I went through the time to provide logic and examples and reasoning and charts, I didn't know we could just say that it wouldn't do dick!

My rebuttal to your tax cuts talking point: It wouldn't do dick, bro.

Try providing me with evidence.
there is none.
There is no way in hell you're a moderate. If you are, this just confirms the fact that the whole of American politics is shifted to the right relative to British politics.

I'd align myself most closely with the Conservative Party, which, in Britain, is the main centre-right party. But definitely more centre than right in its current form. Small government, extensive use of the private and voluntary sectors while keeping healthcare free at the point of use, low taxation for SMALL businesses, generally lower direct taxation and support for civil liberties.

In comparison, the policies you mention above are not moderate, but right-wing. No more immigration? No economic perspective could be used to justify this. Those sort of policy ideas nearly always have racist undertones. If immigrants are taking 'American' jobs, maybe the American workforce in question should get its butt into gear, drop the pride and be prepared to work crappy jobs at the market rate. Most of the people in Britain who advocate a halt to immigration are unemployed, yet unprepared to do the work that is available and underqualified to do the jobs that they feel entitled to. If an immigrant can do it better, let them do it. Then sort out welfare and education policy to get the population more competitive and back to work.

Re healthcare: while I normally advocate some sort of market solution to economic issues, I don't believe that anyone is less entitled to care than anyone else, no matter how little they've worked or earned. I think that smokers, for example, should pay for care they receive related to, say, lung cancer, but wealth should not play a part in keeping someone alive in most cases. In Britain we have free healthcare for all, with the private sector providing for those who want to use it.

Re tax cuts: for large corporations? Yes tax levels for large corporations need to be at an internationally competitive rates, but sustainable growth depends on small businesses. Tax cuts for large corporations will not lead to extensive job creation, when, by definition, corporations that are consistently of a large scale will be in profit and will not hire staff simply according to the rate at which they are taxed for doing so. A change in the tax rates for small businesses, on the other hand, may be the difference between an entrepreneur starting a business which employs twenty people, and not doing so.

Re invasions: yeh, restrict the military to self-defense or the defense of allies according to international agreements, but stop the patriotic bullshit that American governments are so full of. A country should simply be a border within which economic activity can be managed and encouraged, in order that its citizens can live well at minimal cost to the rest of the world. America is not some global police force. And I seriously hope you're joking about the bomb.

Re foreign aid: while 'aid' in many of its current forms does not create sustainable growth in poorer countries, sensible aid packages, such as results-based aid and long-term foreign investment, can only be a good thing. However much Western countries' economies are suffering, we are a lot better off than the rest of the world. The aid budget is usually a tiny proportion of government spending - hardly enough to adversely affect the domestic economy - so if you have any sense of morality, you would be in favour of its continuation, rather than passing that money to tax cuts for big business.

In general, I believe that small government is a good thing. The private sector can often provide a better service at a lower cost. And government spending, in Britain at least, is bloated. People are used to receiving so much from the government that its keeping people out of work and choking the private sector. On that I agree with you. But seriously dude, you are not a moderate.
if only our conservative party were like britain's....:-( the republicans are such children. we can't even have a civil debate in this country.
That takenflight person is an idiot.

I think it's extremely difficult to have (real) moderate views in a country where a majority of the population doesn't know the meaning of moderation.
agreed.
Why do people still insist on trusting corporations with money? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....
because the free market will solve everything without any interference whatsoever!!121121

[Zeran]

Moderates = right-wing populists

that's been my experience, in any case.

[rhinitus]

I don't feel labels are stupid. People who live and die by their labels are usually moronic, but if you can't shoehorn your beliefs into some already established school of thought, your beliefs are probably either scattershot and hypocritical or entirely unformed, such as people referring to themselves as moderates when they mean, 'I'm a Republican who doesn't oppose gay marriage'.


Yeah dude, trying to help out the less fortunate is so unbelievably reckless and selfish. If you're really concerned about your money being 'stolen', why not crow about the top earners getting tax cuts? If they didn't get tax cuts, there'd be less of a deficit, so there'd be more money to go around, so...TA-DA!...there'd be less of 'your' money needed for (reckless :rolleyes:) programs like welfare.

first blurb: i agree, but people in here are hollering about how moderates are just republicans who don't oppose gay marriage. by definition of what republicans identify with on a social level, that makes them more moderate. i still don't know what i am. i just know that the republicans can't seem to get a grasp of reality, and the democrats love bitching and pegging republicans as bigots while trying to raise taxes, etc. you identify yourself as a republican, and all of a sudden you're a racist homophobic hick.

blurb 2: wasn't specifically referring to welfare. i personally don't agree with welfare, but i have a feeling that comes from walking down the streets of chicago, completely annoyed by beggars asking me for money every 12 feet. and i don't know if i agree with tax "cuts" of the most wealthy - but you also have to agree that those tax rates were established in the first place on the notion that even after you take 40ish% of the rich person's earnings, they still have money left over to live. i don't think that is representative of the capitalistic meritocracy we try to establish ourselves as. but yes, i think it's reckless spending when someone decides to save their money and grow their wealth to pass it on to their kids, only to have their kids get taxed at a fucking 55% tax rate, meanwhile spending $18 million rebuilding Recovery.org. sorry i'm not sorry that i think that's reckless. imagine how much more i would support welfare if shit like that wasn't going on.

[Two Headed Girl]

I'm moderate, more apathetic but yeah I'm a moderate.

[caveBEAR]

first blurb: i agree, but people in here are hollering about how moderates are just republicans who don't oppose gay marriage. by definition of what republicans identify with on a social level, that makes them more moderate. i still don't know what i am. i just know that the republicans can't seem to get a grasp of reality, and the democrats love bitching and pegging republicans as bigots while trying to raise taxes, etc. you identify yourself as a republican, and all of a sudden you're a racist homophobic hick.

1. What (socially) separates Republicans from (I assume) Democrats is so far and beyond simply 'gay marriage'. To act like that's the main difference between parties is ridiculous, and assumptions of such (i.e., 'I'm a Republican who likes gay marriage, lol!') just prove how little someone knows about politics.
2. So do statements like 'republicans can't seem to get a grasp of reality, and the democrats love bitching'.
3. 'Pegging republicans as bigots while trying to raise taxes'? What point are you even trying to make here? Is raising taxes bigoted or something in your eyes? Or do you just know as much about sentence structure as you appear to know of politics?
4. No, not Republican. If someone identifies themselves as a Tea Party member, then a small minority of people on the left think you're a racist, homophobe hick, while a majority of people accept this stance as fine and socially acceptable.

blurb 2: wasn't specifically referring to welfare. i personally don't agree with welfare, but i have a feeling that comes from walking down the streets of chicago, completely annoyed by beggars asking me for money every 12 feet. and i don't know if i agree with tax "cuts" of the most wealthy - but you also have to agree that those tax rates were established in the first place on the notion that even after you take 40ish% of the rich person's earnings, they still have money left over to live. i don't think that is representative of the capitalistic meritocracy we try to establish ourselves as. but yes, i think it's reckless spending when someone decides to save their money and grow their wealth to pass it on to their kids, only to have their kids get taxed at a fucking 55% tax rate, meanwhile spending $18 million rebuilding Recovery.org. sorry i'm not sorry that i think that's reckless. imagine how much more i would support welfare if shit like that wasn't going on.

1. What are you trying to say with 'kids getting taxed 55%' and 'reckless spending'? How are either of these related?
2. Do you have any idea how small $18 million is in the scale of the budgets/deficit?
3. I don't think you'd support welfare anymore at all if there was a few extra $18 billions lying around. You don't want to take away tax cuts from the rich, but if things like Recovery.org weren't rebuilt (and other projects you view as 'reckless') you would support welfare? If that's really your thought process/beliefs, you're either clueless or crazy.

[repr1ze]

Yeah dude, trying to help out the less fortunate is so unbelievably reckless and selfish.
Helping the less fortunate is great. Stealing to do so is wrong.

If you're really concerned about your money being 'stolen', why not crow about the top earners getting tax cuts?
Why would he complain about someone getting their money back? At least they're giving some of it back..

If they didn't get tax cuts, there'd be less of a deficit, so there'd be more money to go around, so...TA-DA!...there'd be less of 'your' money needed for (reckless :rolleyes:) programs like welfare.

There would've even be a deficit if it weren't for reckless spending of tax dollars...

[bearpilot]

Just getting into politics, I'm moderate but more left than right. Just like the OP I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative.

I just can't see how I can fully be a liberal or conservative. There are too many issues today and I can't agree with every single one that's linked to a single party.

[caveBEAR]

Helping the less fortunate is great. Stealing to do so is wrong.

We've already gone over this 'taxes = stealing' comment. Your opinion that taxes amounts to stealing is just that; an opinion. You can't just post that and act like you've made a point.

Why would he complain about someone getting their money back? At least they're giving some of it back..

I don't understand the point you're trying to make here? Who's getting their money back? The people getting tax cuts? What are they giving? The amount of tax they actually had to pay? That's not altruistic giving (Santa Claus-style) like you're portraying; that's paying taxes.

There would've even be a deficit if it weren't for reckless spending of tax dollars...

::cough:: Bullshit.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/change_in_federal_deficit%2C_2009-2017.png

I assume you mean 'wouldn't have been a deficit'? No, there would be a deficit. If there were no tax cuts, but still 'reckless spending', we'd still have a deficit. If you ended the tax cuts but still kept the 'reckless spending', you can read that chart and see how much relief we would have on the deficit.

[repr1ze]

We've already gone over this 'taxes = stealing' comment. Your opinion that taxes amounts to stealing is just that; an opinion. You can't just post that and act like you've made a point.
Its very simple. You don't have to call it stealing if you don't want to. There are two ways of getting something; voluntarily and coercively. Taxes are coercive.



I don't understand the point you're trying to make here? Who's getting their money back? The people getting tax cuts? What are they giving? The amount of tax they actually had to pay? That's not altruistic giving (Santa Claus-style) like you're portraying; that's paying taxes.I don't understand what you are saying here. I never said they were giving their money away to the government. I said it's cool that they are getting back money that was taken from them.



::cough:: Bullshit.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/change_in_federal_deficit%2C_2009-2017.png

I assume you mean 'wouldn't have been a deficit'? No, there would be a deficit. If there were no tax cuts, but still 'reckless spending', we'd still have a deficit. If you ended the tax cuts but still kept the 'reckless spending', you can read that chart and see how much relief we would have on the deficit.
This is a severe miscommunication. I said "there wouldn't be a defecit if it weren't for reckless spending". "Reckless spending" is not referring to one specific thing.. It just means that the government is spending borrowed money on programs it doesn't need. Of course there would still be a deficit with or without the tax cuts.

[Scrandon]

Its very simple. You don't have to call it stealing if you don't want to. There are two ways of getting something; voluntarily and coercively. Taxes are coercive.


Is your mind that fucking simple? Part of living in society includes contributing to that society and therefore receiving many amenities that the government provides.

You're a horrible person if you think the rich are burdened because they are taxed in order to help the poor (who the rich most likely took advantage of to earn their money in the first place.)

[GuitarR0cker1]

I guess to the OP, teabagger=moderate.

[rhinitus]

1. What (socially) separates Republicans from (I assume) Democrats is so far and beyond simply 'gay marriage'. To act like that's the main difference between parties is ridiculous, and assumptions of such (i.e., 'I'm a Republican who likes gay marriage, lol!') just prove how little someone knows about politics.
2. So do statements like 'republicans can't seem to get a grasp of reality, and the democrats love bitching'.
3. 'Pegging republicans as bigots while trying to raise taxes'? What point are you even trying to make here? Is raising taxes bigoted or something in your eyes? Or do you just know as much about sentence structure as you appear to know of politics?
4. No, not Republican. If someone identifies themselves as a Tea Party member, then a small minority of people on the left think you're a racist, homophobe hick, while a majority of people accept this stance as fine and socially acceptable.



1. What are you trying to say with 'kids getting taxed 55%' and 'reckless spending'? How are either of these related?
2. Do you have any idea how small $18 million is in the scale of the budgets/deficit?
3. I don't think you'd support welfare anymore at all if there was a few extra $18 billions lying around. You don't want to take away tax cuts from the rich, but if things like Recovery.org weren't rebuilt (and other projects you view as 'reckless') you would support welfare? If that's really your thought process/beliefs, you're either clueless or crazy.

does everything need to be quantifiable? this is why i said that talking about politics is a pain in the ass. you literally just numbered your responses to me. do i claim to be some political expert? no. are there beliefs that i formulate as i pick up bits and pieces of information during my everyday life while balanced with work and other activities? absolutely. because i don't have all day to absorb as much information as i possibly can to fully inform every single thing that i do and belief that i have.

call me ignorant for not having all the facts, but i don't think republicans can get a grasp of reality. the world is changing while many of them want to stand still. and i think democrats love bitching. i also think john mccain is old. why on earth is that something that you feel the need to contest?

i'm not going to go through everything else, but if all you got out of the estate tax statement was the kids having to pay 55% of their parents money to the government, and then question what reckless spending has to do with it, you're not thinking hard enough. i'm just saying the parents' money is given away - and while much of it is spent on good things, there's still a ton of waste in the gov. but $18 million isn't that much in the grand scheme of things, so it shouldn't really matter.

[open mind]

i had a "moderate" who's an honest to goodness "birther" staying at my house for the last couple days.

[Machu505]

I'll respond to Zeran's inquiry on my rejection of an ideological dichotomy on the issue of gun rights without quoting him, since the question was part of a larger post that I do not wish to edit:

Firearms have no emotions. They have no motives or reasoning or beliefs or politics. They are simply human instruments, and should not be viewed as the cause of any crime, unless the crime was committed over a certain weapon.

That does not mean that everyone should be able to purchase guns. The mentally impaired, children, etc. should have reasonable restrictions imposed upon them when looking to purchase a firearm. And one should not be able to buy things like rocket launchers, AK-47s, and hydrogen bombs. What it does mean is that a sane adult should be able to legally buy guns.

When someone walks into my haberdashery and buys a belt, I cannot assume that because a belt can be used to strangle somebody, that in fact the person buying said belt will use it for that purpose. When someone walks into my Cutlery Barn (take notes, AP.net entrepeneurs) and purchases knives, I cannot assume that they will use them for stabbing. These examples are no different from a person buying guns.

Opponents of gun rights might say, "But guns are manufactured to shoot things!" This is true, but these things are not necessarily human beings. Knives are made to cut things, but is it assumed that they'll more often than not be used to cut people? Guns are fairly common in sports. They can be used to shoot Frisbees or quails or red foxes. They can also be used for murder, but they aren't manufactured with that intent.

Gun control is analogus to prohibition. It has no positive effect on crime rates and doesn't inhibit the firearm trade. All it does is create a black market, where prices are inflated and violence is to be assumed.

The point being made is that I don't see my belief in self-ownership and personal freedom to be conflicting with my belief in gun rights.

[x togepi x]

gun control is one of the most privileged positions i've ever heard.

[Machu505]

It appears that in our "moderate" OP's world, we (through the elected government) are the slaves to the corporations' slavemasters. Why should we bow down to them?

[Zeran]

i had a "moderate" who's an honest to goodness "birther" staying at my house for the last couple days.

did you yell at him?

[GeeBee]

Helping the less fortunate is great. Stealing to do so is wrong.
You're stealing from me when you drive on MY interstate without paying your fair share. Quit your bitching.

Its very simple. You don't have to call it stealing if you don't want to. There are two ways of getting something; voluntarily and coercively. Taxes are coercive.
Wow, the black and white thinking doesn't end with CO2, apparently.

This is a severe miscommunication. I said "there wouldn't be a defecit if it weren't for reckless spending". "Reckless spending" is not referring to one specific thing.. It just means that the government is spending borrowed money on programs it doesn't need. Of course there would still be a deficit with or without the tax cuts.
This reads like the backpedaling of a person who doesn't know shit about economics and just got called out for it.

[GeeBee]

I'll respond to Zeran's inquiry on my rejection of an ideological dichotomy on the issue of gun rights without quoting him, since the question was part of a larger post that I do not wish to edit:

Firearms have no emotions. They have no motives or reasoning or beliefs or politics. They are simply human instruments, and should not be viewed as the cause of any crime, unless the crime was committed over a certain weapon.

That does not mean that everyone should be able to purchase guns. The mentally impaired, children, etc. should have reasonable restrictions imposed upon them when looking to purchase a firearm. And one should not be able to buy things like rocket launchers, AK-47s, and hydrogen bombs. What it does mean is that a sane adult should be able to legally buy guns.

When someone walks into my haberdashery and buys a belt, I cannot assume that because a belt can be used to strangle somebody, that in fact the person buying said belt will use it for that purpose. When someone walks into my Cutlery Barn (take notes, AP.net entrepeneurs) and purchases knives, I cannot assume that they will use them for stabbing. These examples are no different from a person buying guns.

Opponents of gun rights might say, "But guns are manufactured to shoot things!" This is true, but these things are not necessarily human beings. Knives are made to cut things, but is it assumed that they'll more often than not be used to cut people? Guns are fairly common in sports. They can be used to shoot Frisbees or quails or red foxes. They can also be used for murder, but they aren't manufactured with that intent.

Gun control is analogus to prohibition. It has no positive effect on crime rates and doesn't inhibit the firearm trade. All it does is create a black market, where prices are inflated and violence is to be assumed.

The point being made is that I don't see my belief in self-ownership and personal freedom to be conflicting with my belief in gun rights.

The only "gun control" I believe in is a clear delineation of what "arms" constitute. An assault rifle doesn't quite fit the bill in my book.

[<*)))><]

I never laughed so much in a politic thread.

[Love As Arson]

I'm fine with coercion, depending on the context.

[GeeBee]

I'm fine with coercion, depending on the context.
I for one HATE being coerced into driving on nice roads, provided with an education, and protected by a police force. THEFT it is.

[Machu505]

The only "gun control" I believe in is a clear delineation of what "arms" constitute. An assault rifle doesn't quite fit the bill in my book.
I think we can all agree that assault rifles are firearms, just not firearms that ought to be legal. But this conversation isn't exactly germaine.

[GeeBee]

I think we can all agree that assault rifles are firearms, just not firearms that ought to be legal. But this conversation isn't exactly germaine.
It so is.
http://www.topnews.in/files/Jermaine-Jackson.jpg

[takenflight]

Because dropping the bomb is an absolute moderate decision.

Protecting national security in a more efficient way than invading & occupying countries has nothing to do with being Moderate or not being Moderate. It has everything to do with saving American lives & cutting government spending.

And for the 5th time, I have clarified that what I mean by dropping the bomb is by airraids...I made a historical reference to Truman quickly ending the Japanese invasion by bombing them. I am not in favor of using Nuclear weapons. I am also not in favor of trying to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan using archaeic ground war tactics. It didn't work in Vietnam & it ain't working now.

[takenflight]

by saying the government shouldn't be able to take money i earned and spend it recklessly however they so choose


THANK YOU!

I think people who accuse other people who want to cut welfare of bveing rascisit are the ones doing the rascist pigeonholing themselves...

Why do I have to be racsit to be in favor of cutting welfare?

There are people of all races who vote for and against this...my accusers make no sense whatsoever, but keep telling yourself I'm racist if it makes your political views justifiable in your own mind

[Love As Arson]

Protecting national security in a more efficient way than invading & occupying countries has nothing to do with being Moderate or not being Moderate. It has everything to do with saving American lives & cutting government spending.

And for the 5th time, I have clarified that what I mean by dropping the bomb is by airraids...I made a historical reference to Truman quickly ending the Japanese invasion by bombing them. I am not in favor of using Nuclear weapons. I am also not in favor of trying to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan using archaeic ground war tactics. It didn't work in Vietnam & it ain't working now.

There is an extreme way in which one approaches "saving American lives". For example, invading sovereign nations and murdering civilians. The moderate position would be to stop implementing policies which create rancor throughout the world. Also, I like how you justify fighting terrorism by citing one of the worst terrorist attacks the world have ever seen.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

THANK YOU!

I think people who accuse other people who want to cut welfare of bveing rascisit are the ones doing the rascist pigeonholing themselves...

Why do I have to be racsit to be in favor of cutting welfare?

There are people of all races who vote for and against this...my accusers make no sense whatsoever, but keep telling yourself I'm racist if it makes your political views justifiable in your own mind

We're not calling you racist. We're calling you naïve.

[takenflight]

I for one HATE being coerced into driving on nice roads, provided with an education, and protected by a police force. THEFT it is.

nice roads?

have you been to wisconsin lately? haha...we spend so much on road construction & and get nothing done...I have never seen such wasteful mismanagement of budget

[takenflight]

There is an extreme way in which one approaches "saving American lives". For example, invading sovereign nations and murdering civilians. The moderate position would be to stop implementing policies which create rancor throughout the world. Also, I like how you justify fighting terrorism by citing one of the worst terrorist attacks the world have ever seen.

Are you just reading my name and not my posts?

I SAID I DO NOT ADVOCATE INVASIONS OR OCCUPATIONS

FOR CHRIST SAKE, READ BEFORE YOU POST!

[takenflight]

Glad to see takenflight has gotten new material.

You refering to the music?

[GeeBee]

nice roads?

have you been to wisconsin lately? haha...we spend so much on road construction & and get nothing done...I have never seen such wasteful mismanagement of budget

This is a "federal highway" in Russia. Don't bitch.
http://weblog.sinteur.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/13.jpg

[caveBEAR]

Protecting national security in a more efficient way than invading & occupying countries has nothing to do with being Moderate or not being Moderate. It has everything to do with saving American lives & cutting government spending.

And for the 5th time, I have clarified that what I mean by dropping the bomb is by airraids...I made a historical reference to Truman quickly ending the Japanese invasion by bombing them. I am not in favor of using Nuclear weapons. I am also not in favor of trying to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan using archaeic ground war tactics. It didn't work in Vietnam & it ain't working now.

The problem here is that your spectrum appears to be as follows; 'being attacked' <--> 'air raids' <--> 'nuclear bombing'.

This is such a minute part of all worldviews (and it's a particularly conservative/Right end of the spectrum) that it's like saying 'red' <--> 'orange' <--> 'yellow', and then acting like you covered the whole Crayola box. Your shortsightedness (politically) doesn't stick you in the center (i.e., moderate) of political thought, it sticks you in the middle of your limited worldview.

I think people who accuse other people who want to cut welfare of bveing rascisit are the ones doing the rascist pigeonholing themselves...

Yeah dude, and the people from PETA are secretly fans of circuses.

Why do I have to be racsit to be in favor of cutting welfare?

There are people of all races who vote for and against this...my accusers make no sense whatsoever, but keep telling yourself I'm racist if it makes your political views justifiable in your own mind

No one is saying you're racist. We are pointing out, however, that it is an attribute of some of the less informed members of conservative thought, a.k.a., the Tea Party. It's like saying 'not are homophobes are Nazis, but all Nazis aren't fans of homosexuals'. Not everyone who opposes welfare is racist; however, most racist people don't support welfare. Over the internet, with beliefs that seem to steer 'conservatively', 'indignantly' and "not sticking to EITHER big party" (ooooh, what rebels), you'd have to expect the racist jabs, as you seem like a Teabagger.

Callz 'em as I ceez 'em
:shrug:

[GeeBee]

Yeah, guys. Come on. Quit calling people rascisit

[caveBEAR]

Yeah, guys. Come on. Quit calling people

With your avatar, I hear that in my head with that 50's 'noir' movies, with maybe a 'say guys' thrown in there for good measure.

[GeeBee]

With your avatar, I hear that in my head with that 50's 'noir' movies, with maybe a 'say guys' thrown in there for good measure.

I'm a scat man. Dee-bah-bah-bah-doo-boop.

[takenflight]

The problem here is that your spectrum appears to be as follows; 'being attacked' <--> 'air raids' <--> 'nuclear bombing'.

This is such a minute part of all worldviews (and it's a particularly conservative/Right end of the spectrum) that it's like saying 'red' <--> 'orange' <--> 'yellow', and then acting like you covered the whole Crayola box. Your shortsightedness (politically) doesn't stick you in the center (i.e., moderate) of political thought, it sticks you in the middle of your limited worldview.



Yeah dude, and the people from PETA are secretly fans of circuses.



No one is saying you're racist. We are pointing out, however, that it is an attribute of some of the less informed members of conservative thought, a.k.a., the Tea Party. It's like saying 'not are homophobes are Nazis, but all Nazis aren't fans of homosexuals'. Not everyone who opposes welfare is racist; however, most racist people don't support welfare. Over the internet, with beliefs that seem to steer 'conservatively', 'indignantly' and "not sticking to EITHER big party" (ooooh, what rebels), you'd have to expect the racist jabs, as you seem like a Teabagger.

Callz 'em as I ceez 'em
:shrug:

I still don't see what you are getting at here and why you keep likening me to a "tea-bagger"...You also act as if there are no racists in the liberal camp, only racists in the less educated part of the tea party...I'm curious on your viewpoints when it comes to the black panthers, or your views on the moron on nbc the other night trying tell a Swedish-American he is a benefactor of slavery by default..

There are plenty of black conservatives out there and plenty of white liberals. You keep getting off topic and bringing race into it.

My original post DID NOT ONCE REFER TO RACE! WHY DO YOU INSIST ON BRINGING INTO THE CONVERSATIONI,LOL...

Does it make you uncomfortable that I am not a racist and am in favor of cutting wasteful government spending?

Also...I am not against all welfare...I am against creating duplicate programs...ie obamacare when we already have programs in place in my state that are for the same small group of people

[takenflight]

I'm a scat man. Dee-bah-bah-bah-doo-boop.


Yeah its not a typo...I really don't know how to spell (sarcasm)

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Yeah its not a typo...I really don't know how to spell (sarcasm)

Maybe your fingers are too fat. If you need assistance, please smash your keyboard with your palm now.

[GeeBee]

I still don't see what you are getting at here and why you keep likening me to a "tea-bagger"
Probably because, like tea-baggers, you simply spout AM radio-fed soundbites without any real understanding of what the fuck you're talking about.
You also act as if there are no racists in the liberal camp, only racists in the less educated part of the tea party
Which is an unfair generalization...why?
I'm curious on your viewpoints when it comes to the black panthers
Oh, you mean the pseudo-controversy about the black panthers manufactured by Faux News?

There are plenty of black conservatives out there and plenty of white liberals. You keep getting off topic and bringing race into it.
Plenty of black conservatives? Back this up with some numbers, please. "Plenty" sounds like a substantial number.

Does it make you uncomfortable that I am not a racist and am in favor of cutting wasteful government spending?
No, it makes me uncomfortable that you can't elaborate on what "wasteful government spending" is beyond what Glenn Beck tells you it is.
obamacare when we already have programs in place in my state that are for the same small group of people
Small group of people...meaning the uninsured? Since when was ONE IN FIVE a "small group"?
http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/10/number-of-uninsured-americans-rises-census-bureau-announces-2/

[GeeBee]

Yeah its not a typo...I really don't know how to spell (sarcasm)

Yeah, and I really have no reason to think you're a moron anyway (sarcasm).

[takenflight]

Maybe your fingers are too fat. If you need assistance, please smash your keyboard with your palm now.


Nahh...my fingers are lean...5'9 160...

Its the naive posters who don't understand how overtaxing businesses is counter-productive to job creation that piss me off and make me type too fast...I get pissed when people call me a racist just because they don't share my views on fiscal accountability

[GeeBee]

Nahh...my fingers are lean...5'9 160...

Its the naive posters who don't understand how overtaxing businesses is counter-productive to job creation that piss me off and make me type too fast...I get pissed when people call me a racist just because they don't share my views on fiscal accountability

The Bush tax cuts resulted in how many new jobs again?
Oh, wait...they DIDN'T. http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-news/blog/macro-view/extending-the-bush-tax-cuts-would-they-create-more-jobs-or-just-comfort-the-comfortable/2298/

I don't think you're a racist. I think you're a moron.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Plenty of black conservatives? Back this up with some numbers, please. "Plenty" sounds like a substantial number.

Rush Limbaugh's sidekick Bo Snerdley is black and the show's official Barack Obama criticizer... that's one black conservative.

[GeeBee]

http://blogs.ajc.com/cynthia-tucker/files/2010/07/GR2010010101701.gif

[takenflight]

Probably because, like tea-baggers, you simply spout AM radio-fed soundbites without any real understanding of what the fuck you're talking about.

Which is an unfair generalization...why?

Oh, you mean the pseudo-controversy about the black panthers manufactured by Faux News?


Plenty of black conservatives? Back this up with some numbers, please. "Plenty" sounds like a substantial number.


No, it makes me uncomfortable that you can't elaborate on what "wasteful government spending" is beyond what Glenn Beck tells you it is.

Small group of people...meaning the uninsured? Since when was ONE IN FIVE a "small group"?
http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/10/number-of-uninsured-americans-rises-census-bureau-announces-2/

Want black conservatives?


Here you go....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DlTgrMCxPg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnw-oSUp2ok&feature=related


So 80 percent of people who have insurance should have to pay more for their insurance eo that the 20 percent, probably of which only half would actually want insurance, could have it?

Wow...

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Nahh...my fingers are lean...5'9 160...

Its the naive posters who don't understand how overtaxing businesses is counter-productive to job creation that piss me off and make me type too fast...I get pissed when people call me a racist just because they don't share my views on fiscal accountability

Then you should understand that humans, by nature, could be or can be fiscally irresponsible.

[GeeBee]

Want black conservatives?


Here you go....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DlTgrMCxPg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnw-oSUp2ok&feature=related

:lol:
I asked you to back your claim of "PLENTY" up with some solid numbers. Not some youtube clips. Get me percentages.

EDIT: And please respond to the rest of the rebuttals in that post, since you're on such a roll...

[GeeBee]

So 80 percent of people who have insurance should have to pay more for their insurance eo that the 20 percent, probably of which only half would actually want insurance, could have it?

Wow...

Nice red herring. Stay on topic, turbo.
You claimed the uninsured were a "small group". So which is it? You're a selfish prick, or just bad with math?

And you DO pay more for the uninsured, you idiot. Single payer would ameliorate that, not exacerbate it.

[takenflight]

:lol:
I asked you to back your claim of "PLENTY" up with some solid numbers. Not some youtube clips. Get me percentages.

EDIT: And please respond to the rest of the rebuttals in that post, since you're on such a roll...

percentages?

are you fucking kidding me? I have a life...

As if all people go & even register to vote in the 1st place...

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

So 80 percent of people who have insurance should have to pay more for their insurance eo that the 20 percent, probably of which only half would actually want insurance, could have it?

Wow...

I have no health insurance. Is it because I'm a lazy bum who asks for handouts or is it because I was laid off due to an economic chain reaction?

[GeeBee]

percentages?

are you fucking kidding me? I have a life...

As if all people go & even register to vote in the 1st place...

Ah, so you're condescending to us mere mortals to inform us about the travesties of government waste and economic policy, but when it comes to raw data and facts, you "have a life", and can't be bothered, eh? I gotcha.

Speaking of your "life"...the world already has 15 million Blink-182 wannabes. Your band sucks.

[GeeBee]

I have no health insurance. Is it because I'm a lazy bum who asks for handouts or is it because I was laid off due to an economic chain reaction?

Set in motion by the very policies takenflight espouses! THE IRONY!

[jwicklun]

Truthiness: "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.

[GeeBee]

Taken Flight is a band who GETS politics. CLEARLY:
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=380636706&blogId=512808095
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt70/takenflight/JULY16TH.jpg

[perceptrons]

percentages?

are you fucking kidding me? I have a life...

As if all people go & even register to vote in the 1st place...
Moving beyond your pathetic "I have a life..." cop out, what point are you trying to make in the last section of your post? Because, to me, it sounds incredibly stupid.

[jwicklun]

Taken Flight is a band who GETS politics. CLEARLY:
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=380636706&blogId=512808095
http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt70/takenflight/JULY16TH.jpg

Clearly, a moderate.

[GeeBee]

Clearly, a moderate.

What with all the links to tea-bagger speeches, Newsmax articles, and Fox News links...how could there be any doubt?

[jwicklun]

What with all the links to tea-bagger speeches, Newsmax articles, and Fox News links...how could there be any doubt?

Again in the words of Stephen Colbert: There's two sides of the story. My perspective, and the perspective that agrees with me.

[GeeBee]

Again in the words of Stephen Colbert: There's two sides of the story. My perspective, and the perspective that agrees with me.

It's hilarious to watch these types squirm when you demand they get past the soundbites and actually substantiate their claims. "Pshsh...I have a life, y'know..."

[asmolitor]

nice roads?

have you been to wisconsin lately? haha...we spend so much on road construction & and get nothing done...I have never seen such wasteful mismanagement of budget

Also...I am not against all welfare...I am against creating duplicate programs...ie obamacare when we already have programs in place in my state that are for the same small group of people

yeahhhh, no. categorically untrue on both accounts.

[GeeBee]

takenflight's views, as posted on their myspace page (with a whopping 2 fans responding)

Regardless if you are a republican, democrat, independent or other party affiliation, if you are a legal citizen of the United States, you are an American.

America was founded on the principles of democracy & capitalism & for years our country has stood up against agression from Monarchy, Communism, Socialism, Facism & Terrorism.

No matter who you voted for, you really should educate yourself on what is going on with our current government's "new" policies. We are providing links about what the government is doing with our freedom of speech rights, lies about the health care reform proposals, allowing HIV positive immigrants to come to this country & spread disease, forcing students to stay in school longer & hiding their affiliations with socialistic & communist ideals.

We encourage you if you want to have open dialogue with us on this blog & your members of congress on these issues if they concern you.

We as a band have never considered ourselves a "politcal" band & normally we don't sing about politics, but due to the recent changes in government policies, we have no choice to stand up & voice our opinions. It is our right & we will exercise our freedom of speech rights. Our new song "Burn it" reflect our views on the subject in the lyrics.

We just want our American fans, to take a look at this information if you want & take it for what its worth. Here are some if the links to some of the most controversial issues that concern us below:

While I agree that balance is what we need, the govermenments proposales are simply ludicrous, silly & an attempt to lead us into communism.

If a "public healthcare plan" was introduced, it would wind up costing us more than our current system. Obama knows this & now that that option got shot down, he is using his puppet Baucus, to introuduce another option destined to fail, so that we will finally accept the public health care plan.

Under the Baucus proposal EVERYONE MAKING OVER $14, 000 PER YEAR would be required to buy insurance with a maximum of 10% of your income (ie if you make $2,000 gross a month, you could be forced to pay up to $200 per month for health insurance even if you don't need/want it & if you don't YOU PAY A $750 PENALTY & IF YOU DON'T PAY THAT YOU GO TO JAIL!! IN addition, no insurance company could deny coverage for any pre-existing conditions. What will this do? THIS WILL MAKE INSURANCE PREMIUMS WHICH ARE ALREADY HIGH, SKYROCKET!! This is because the insurance companies will have to penalize the healthy people to make up for having to cover all of the very sick people. In addition, they want to increase taxes on insurance companies & those of course those costs will be passed on to the MEMBERS OF THE PLANS!! THE PEOPLE!!

Then, when the people are DOWN ON THEIR KNEES NOT BEING TO AFFORD THEIR PREMIUMS, the Governement will RE-INTRODUCE theiutr public option, which no doctors want to accept & won't cover dental or vision. If you compare government plans with private plans there is no comparision. Look no further than Original Medicare (Government) VS Medicare Advantage (Private Insurance). Disabled & Seniors on Medicare Advantage get vision & dental & more PREVENTIVE benefits whereas government run Medicare doesnt cover dental or vision & forces high payments on preventive services. If you take care of things tyhrough preventive care, studies show you are less likely to get really sick later. Wouldn't you rather have your grandparents healthy than sick? If they are healtier they wont cost us as much money in taxes to pay for more Medicare & Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage members are hospitalized 28% less than those on Government run Medicare, yet Obama wants to get rid of Medicare Advantage, because he is a socialist.

Another thing to consider...Don;t we already have coverage for people who cant get insurance? We have Medicaid for low-income people in their respective states. Here in Wisconsin we have "HIRSP" a state program for people who can;t get insurance for pre-existing conditions, so they get guaranteed coverage. We have patient assitance programs run by clinics & hospitals, free drug discount programs, $4 generic drugs from wal-mart, "Quick-Care" programs like in Wisconsin Aurora or Bellin for people with no insurance to get a doctor visit for $60. Walgreens offers $25 flu shots, Emergency rooms CANNOT REFUSE YOU IF YOU ARE DYING!!, etc, etc. Do we really need to spend $900 billion & re-vamp the entire system?

85% of Americans are happy with their current coverage. Do we need to make 85% unhappy to please the 15% who are not? What happened to majority rules?

For folks on employer plans, do you think your employer will continue paying for a private plan that offers dental & vision when they can just buy the crappy goverment plan that doesnt cover those? They wont & you wont be able to choose what insurance you want because your emplyer will opt for the cheapest options.

Its a magic trick, an illusion, Obama says you will be able to keep your insurance if you are happy, but you wont. I am an insurance agent & I work with doctors who say they would not ACCEPT PUBLIC PLANS!! The government wants to pay doctors & hospitals less! This will result in lower-quality care & long lines at the doctor's office. My ancestors came from Poland when they had communism & socialized medicine in the 80's & even though they are not communist anymore, they still have publich health insurance & people ther wait in lines to get seen & usually die before they can get the care they need because the doctors are on strike & underpaid!! Canada has the same problem & they are begging for PRIVATE INSURANCE BECAUSE SOCIALISED MEDICINE DOESN'T WORK!!

If you were a doctor would you spend your life savings on Medical school & then accept $35 a visit & barely be able to pay your staff or afford equipment?

We don't need to scrap the system we have now, We just to need to make small revisions.

Here is my suggestion...

Instead of taxing insurance companies more, why not give them a break? Lets also give employers a tx break so that they can afford to offer insurance to more employees? Now the insurance companies would also have more money & be able to cover more pre-exisintg conditions. WIN WIN!!

Now if you still can;t get coverage, instead of cutting Medicare Advantage for the seniors & disabled who really need insurance, HOW ABOUT CUTTING FUNDING FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON WHY FROGS IN BRAZIL PIS GREEN??!! WHO THE FUCK CARES!! DO WE REALLY NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON SPACE EXPLORATION RIGHT NOW??!! STOP PAYING FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!!

If we saved THAT money, we'd have enough to provide a special plan that would require you to QUALIFY FOR that would't cost us hardly anywhere near $900 Billion to provide to help those in need.

OBAMA IS A SMOOTH TALKING LIAR TRYING TO TRICK YOU INTO ACCEPTING SOCIALISM. LOOK NO FRUTHER THAN HIS CZAR, SOTOMAYOR WHO'S HERO IS NORMAN THOMAS...THOMAS ONCE QUOTED...:Americans will never knowlingly adopt socialsim, but under the term liberalism, they will adopt every idea of socialism unti one day America will become a Socialist country without knowing how it happened"


CREEPY!! THINK ABOUT IT!!



Nothing like unsubstantiated garbage and empty hyperbole to get across that MODERATE message...

[GeeBee]

And 10 bucks says he never returns...
Sigh.
Well, that was fun.

[perceptrons]

It is one of the biggest pet peeves of mine when people attack spending money on scientific research.

[GeeBee]

It is one of the biggest pet peeves of mine when people attack spending money on scientific research.

Pshsh. Clearly the roads in Wisconsin are in a state of such disrepair that it's simply irresponsible to steer money away from them toward any kind of whimsical scientific endeavors...

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

I'll give "Taken Flight" the band the benefit of the doubt... they are essentially a small business who are trying to make a name for themselves and hope to earn revenue through CD sales, touring, and merch sales. There should be no denying that they are trying to earn a living through capitalist principles. I'll give them that respect. Yet, from a critical standpoint, they're going to have a hard time getting noticed with such a shitty MySpace layout.

[jwicklun]

takenflight's views, as posted on their myspace page (with a whopping 2 fans responding)

Nothing like unsubstantiated garbage and empty hyperbole to get across that MODERATE message...


allowing HIV positive immigrants to come to this country & spread disease, forcing students to stay in school longer & hiding their affiliations with socialistic & communist ideals.

Holy hell how did we miss this piece of idiocy?

[open mind]

did you yell at him?

i told him that i believe that obama isn't a citizen about as much as i believe he's a fascist, communist, secret muslim, with a radical christian pastor.

[Scrandon]

Nahh...my fingers are lean...5'9 160...

Its the naive posters who don't understand how overtaxing businesses is counter-productive to job creation that piss me off and make me type too fast...
Businesses are not overtaxed, you were already proven wrong on this. This will be the third post in which I beg you to provide me any evidence whatsoever to back your proposed economic policies, and I will most likely not receive a reply, again.

You're the poor naive soul who buys in to political ideology without considering "facts".

[GeeBee]

I'll give "Taken Flight" the band the benefit of the doubt... they are essentially a small business who are trying to make a name for themselves and hope to earn revenue through CD sales, touring, and merch sales. There should be no denying that they are trying to earn a living through capitalist principles. I'll give them that respect. Yet, from a critical standpoint, they're going to have a hard time getting noticed with such a shitty MySpace layout.

The music itself also isn't doing them any favors...

[caveBEAR]

The music itself also isn't doing them any favors...

:lol: Ha ha ha ha, have you listened to their song 'Burn It'? The whole music player is just comedy gold. It's like if rich kids were inspired by Anti-Flag's back catalog.

[Zeran]

takenflight's views, as posted on their myspace page (with a whopping 2 fans responding)

Nothing like unsubstantiated garbage and empty hyperbole to get across that MODERATE message...


that was truly painful to read.

i do like me some CAP LOCKS though.

[Zeran]

i still can't believe that people get so angry over health care. health care. i just don't understand it.

[caveBEAR]

i still can't believe that people get so angry over health care. health care. i just don't understand it.

Health care is a conspiracy.

[GeeBee]

:lol: Ha ha ha ha, have you listened to their song 'Burn It'? The whole music player is just comedy gold. It's like if rich kids were inspired by Anti-Flag's back catalog.

The lyrics are DEEEEEEEEEEP. Seriously.

[caveBEAR]

The lyrics are DEEEEEEEEEEP. Seriously.

'Hypocrite' cuts like a knife; it has such groundbreaking views as 'politicians say one thing...& DO ANOTHER!' Dun . Dun . DUUUN!!!

[GeeBee]

'Hypocrite' cuts like a knife; it has such groundbreaking views as 'politicians say one thing...& DO ANOTHER!' Dun . Dun . DUUUN!!!

I find the band's self-description to be far more eloquent and apt than anything I could possibly come up with:

Taken Flight is a high energy Power-Pop/Pop-Punk band based out of Green Bay, Wisconsin. From the tongue in cheek humor, to the powerful anthemic messages about topics ranging from booze & girls to mistrust of politicians, the bands lyrical content varies based upon what inspires them at that particular time. "The philosophy here is we're going to write about topics that people can relate to. Whether thats about relationships, having too much to drink & making a fool of yourself or voicing conerns about the government or current affairs, it depends on what inspires us at that time", says frontman/guitarist Jay Wisneski. The band also prides itself on an interactive live performance, punk rock attitude & the catchiest of power-pop hooks that always leave you begging for more! From the sing along chouruses to the pounding, heart stopping beats, this band has everything you want in a great rock band! Over the past 2 years the band has worked hard at getting the music heard via internet, radio & any other networking sources available. The band has consistenly played shows with other up and coming local Wisconsin acts, as well as opened up for national acts such as Relient K, Ludo & We are Heroes. In Feb 2009, the band released "Two Cities", a 4 song EP. The songs "Short Skirts & Pantyhose", "1987" & "986 Miles", all off of the "Two Cities" EP, have all received radio airplay on major & college radio stations in Wisconsin. Recently, "1987", another song off of the "Two Cities"EP, was submitted to the Quickstar productions pop-punk compilation "Vs the World", which was released nationally in Oct 2009. The song also appeared on Whatthepunk's 2009 punk rock compilation which was handed out to fans at the Warped Tour! Most recently, in November 2009, the band released a follow up Self-titled EP, which features 3 new songs , "Burn It", "Wasted" & "Beliefs of a lost past" as well as a revamped version of "1987", called "1987 Parkview Road". With some significant accomplishment

[sjb2k1]

this thread is going places.

[repr1ze]

Is your mind that fucking simple? Part of living in society includes contributing to that society and therefore receiving many amenities that the government provides.

You're a horrible person if you think the rich are burdened because they are taxed in order to help the poor (who the rich most likely took advantage of to earn their money in the first place.)

Did I say anything about sympathy for the rich? No. I simply stated that, in my opinion, acquiring wealth coercively is wrong. Whether it be taxation or any coercive things wealthy people have done to the poor (bailouts, unnatural monopolies etc)

[repr1ze]

You're stealing from me when you drive on MY interstate without paying your fair share. Quit your bitching.
Let's say I am stealing from you from driving on your interstate. Does that justify more stealing?


Wow, the black and white thinking doesn't end with CO2, apparently.
Nope.

This reads like the backpedaling of a person who doesn't know shit about economics and just got called out for it.
You're right. I don't know shit about economics. I'm just a stupid yokel from Georgia who got his degree in making cornbread.

[GeeBee]

Let's say I am stealing from you from driving on your interstate. Does that justify more stealing?
As has been pointed out many times...your use of the words "stealing", "theft", "coercion" in regards to taxation do not make it so. No one's got a gun to your head, and you're free to go Kaczynski-style and hole up in the woods where no IRS man can find you. Live off the land if you're so goddamn self-sufficient.

You're right. I don't know shit about economics. I'm just a stupid yokel from Georgia who got his degree in making cornbread.
This took guts to admit, and I admire your candor.

[caveBEAR]

:-d

[takenflight]

We really don't give a shit if you like our band or not....
But back on topic...
As far as health care goes...quit saying I'm selfish...I simply have a different solution to the healthcare problem. One that is not as radical as the Obama Administrations "solutuion"....
As far as stimulating the conomy & job growth...
I agree with Fred Thompson's FACTUAL assessments here
http://news.newsmax.com/images/22714/thompsonpic.jpg
Sen. Fred Thompson
Our economy is as weak as a kitten, crawling out of a horrible recession and Congress is on the verge of letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
Yes, it's true. On Dec. 31 of this year, all of the Bush tax cuts will expire completely in one fell swoop.


Unless Congress acts, those tax hikes are going to hit like a ton of bricks.
When the Bush cuts expire, income tax rates will rise by 10 percent or more for every tax bracket.
Capital gains taxes will rise by one-third, and the top rate on dividend taxes will almost triple.
These tax increases will have a devastating effect on the economy.
They will crush jobs, deliver a fresh dose of misery to small business owners, and if you’re wondering whether or not your taxes are going to go up, here’s your answer:
If you pay taxes, your tax bill is going up — way up!
Liberals in the Obama administration say they just want to increase income taxes for the "rich." But Obama forgets that the "rich" include the most productive, most successful, and most entrepreneurial wage earners in the country.
If he raises their taxes, they will simply spend and invest less.
Even Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has testified before Congress that this is not the time to raise taxes — the economy is simply too fragile.
Many in Congress agree. Even three leading Democratic senators came out and said the Bush tax cuts should be fully renewed, even for those who are making high incomes.
These Democrats understand that raising taxes in the middle of a recession is a recipe for disaster.
President Obama doesn't get it. He is simply unwilling to take practical steps to protect the economy and reassure the markets.
I fear that unless Congress and the president act promptly, many investors may sell their stocks and bonds to lock in profits at lower rates this year, sparking a major market decline next year.
Clearly, the public wants to keep the Bush tax cuts. When they were implemented in 2001 and 2003 after the 9/11 attacks and the dot-com crash of the ’90s, they helped jump start the economy.
Some say that we need to worry about the deficit, and we should raise taxes to close this staggering burden to the economy.
The deficit is a real problem. But it wasn't caused by the Bush tax cuts. It was caused by out-of-control spending by Congress.
In fact, there have been three major tax cuts in recent history: the Kennedy cuts of the 1960s, the Reagan "Kemp-Roth" cuts of 1980s, and the Bush tax cuts. All helped spur economic activity and actually increased government revenues.
It's a simple truism of economics: If you tax something, you get less of it; if you subsidize something, you get more of it.
The Obama administration is dead-set on taxing consumer spending, productivity, and investment — while they want to dramatically increase spending on social programs.
Back in 2009, President Obama demanded that Congress pass the largest single spending bill in history — the $787 billion "stimulus" program.
He promised this would propel the U.S. economy and lower unemployment to 8 percent within 18 months.
The Obama stimulus has been a dud. Unemployment continues at almost 10 percent — and is much higher if you factor in all of those who have simply given up looking for work.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

We really don't give a shit if you like our band or not....

But back on topic...

As far as health care goes...quit saying I'm selfish...I simply have a different solution to the healthcare problem. One that is not as radical as the Obama Administrations "solutuion"....

As far as stimulating the conomy & job growth...

I agree with Fred Thompson's FACTUAL assessments here:

Our economy is as weak as a kitten, crawling out of a horrible recession and Congress is on the verge of letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
Yes, it's true. On Dec. 31 of this year, all of the Bush tax cuts will expire completely in one fell swoop.
http://news.newsmax.com/images/22714/thompsonpic.jpg
Sen. Fred Thompson

Unless Congress acts, those tax hikes are going to hit like a ton of bricks.
When the Bush cuts expire, income tax rates will rise by 10 percent or more for every tax bracket.
Capital gains taxes will rise by one-third, and the top rate on dividend taxes will almost triple.
These tax increases will have a devastating effect on the economy.
They will crush jobs, deliver a fresh dose of misery to small business owners, and if you’re wondering whether or not your taxes are going to go up, here’s your answer:
If you pay taxes, your tax bill is going up — way up!
Liberals in the Obama administration say they just want to increase income taxes for the "rich." But Obama forgets that the "rich" include the most productive, most successful, and most entrepreneurial wage earners in the country.
If he raises their taxes, they will simply spend and invest less.
Even Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has testified before Congress that this is not the time to raise taxes — the economy is simply too fragile.
Many in Congress agree. Even three leading Democratic senators came out and said the Bush tax cuts should be fully renewed, even for those who are making high incomes.
These Democrats understand that raising taxes in the middle of a recession is a recipe for disaster.
President Obama doesn't get it. He is simply unwilling to take practical steps to protect the economy and reassure the markets.
I fear that unless Congress and the president act promptly, many investors may sell their stocks and bonds to lock in profits at lower rates this year, sparking a major market decline next year.
Clearly, the public wants to keep the Bush tax cuts. When they were implemented in 2001 and 2003 after the 9/11 attacks and the dot-com crash of the ’90s, they helped jump start the economy.
Some say that we need to worry about the deficit, and we should raise taxes to close this staggering burden to the economy.
The deficit is a real problem. But it wasn't caused by the Bush tax cuts. It was caused by out-of-control spending by Congress.
In fact, there have been three major tax cuts in recent history: the Kennedy cuts of the 1960s, the Reagan "Kemp-Roth" cuts of 1980s, and the Bush tax cuts. All helped spur economic activity and actually increased government revenues.
It's a simple truism of economics: If you tax something, you get less of it; if you subsidize something, you get more of it.
The Obama administration is dead-set on taxing consumer spending, productivity, and investment — while they want to dramatically increase spending on social programs.
Back in 2009, President Obama demanded that Congress pass the largest single spending bill in history — the $787 billion "stimulus" program.
He promised this would propel the U.S. economy and lower unemployment to 8 percent within 18 months.
The Obama stimulus has been a dud. Unemployment continues at almost 10 percent — and is much higher if you factor in all of those who have simply given up looking for work.

a) Given all the hard work and effort you put into your band, we know deep down you feel demotivated by our criticism.
b) What conservative blog did you copy and paste the rest of your post?

[loveisdead]

a) Given all the hard work and effort you put into your band, we know deep down you feel demotivated by our criticism.
b) What conservative blog did you copy and paste the rest of your post?

I just spent 15 minutes editing that monstrosity. Almost done haha.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

I just realized that Takenflight has edited his post, attributing most of it to that of Fred Thompson. I want it noted that at the time of my reply, Takenflight had posted a what appeared to be an argument originally created by himself and only himself.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

I just spent 15 minutes editing that monstrosity. Almost done haha.

oh wait, did you do that?

[Scrandon]

You're right. I don't know shit about economics. I'm just a stupid yokel from Georgia who got his degree in making cornbread.
My guess was that you had no degree, but props on that.
We really don't give a shit if you like our band or not....
But back on topic...
As far as health care goes...quit saying I'm selfish...I simply have a different solution to the healthcare problem. One that is not as radical as the Obama Administrations "solutuion"....
As far as stimulating the conomy & job growth...
I agree with Fred Thompson's FACTUAL assessments here
Facts? I see no facts, I see Fred Thompson speculating as to what he thinks will happen if the tax cuts expire.

[loveisdead]

We really don't give a shit if you like our band or not....
But back on topic...
As far as health care goes...quit saying I'm selfish...I simply have a different solution to the healthcare problem. One that is not as radical as the Obama Administrations "solutuion"....
Your healthcare solution is just as "radical" as Obama's.


You would've been way better off not coming back here and posting. You were called out for being a moron by everyone for a reason.

What is factual about what Fred Thompson said? The very good majority of that is his opinion.

[loveisdead]

oh wait, did you do that?

He posted it how you quoted it. The way it is now is entirely because of me.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

He posted it how you quoted it. The way it is now is entirely because of me.

My mistake... doesn't change the fact that his post tried to pass itself off as original thought.

[loveisdead]

My mistake... doesn't change the fact that his post tried to pass itself off as original thought.

No I don't think he did. I just think it was scrambled about so it looked that way.

[takenflight]

I purposely copied & pasted Fred Thompson's blurb...

If you read my post, I never claimed to write it...only that I agree with his assesments...

And no, i don't care if you like the band or not...thats not why we play...I've been playing music for 15 years and that purpose is the same now as it was when I started...I play for the love...And we are not aband that falls into a gray area...You either love us or you hate us

[loveisdead]

I purposely copied & pasted Fred Thompson's blurb...

If you read my post, I never claimed to write it...only that I agree with his assesments...

And no, i don't care if you like the band or not...thats not why we play...I've been playing music for 15 years and that purpose is the same now as it was when I started...I play for the love...And we are not aband that falls into a gray area...You either love us or you hate us

I know. I had to google shit and spend 15 minutes editing your post so that everyone else can figure out that you were just posting what Fred Thompson said. So thanks for having 0 original thoughts, nor the ability to back up anything Fred Thompson said. And also for not having the ability to tell the difference between facts and opinions. YOU ARE FUCKING AWESOME!!!!

[Scrandon]

I purposely copied & pasted Fred Thompson's blurb...

If you read my post, I never claimed to write it...only that I agree with his assesments...

And no, i don't care if you like the band or not...thats not why we play...I've been playing music for 15 years and that purpose is the same now as it was when I started...I play for the love...And we are not aband that falls into a gray area...You either love us or you hate us
If you don't care about the band, stop talking about the band. There were no facts in that crap you posted. Just a lot of Fred Thompson's "gut feeling", sans logic and historical perspective.

[takenflight]

The tax cuts stimulated the economy when they were implemented

If you honestly think smnall business will start hiring people with tax hikes, you're a complete idiot who bases their opinions onbias & irrational thought processes

[loveisdead]

The tax cuts stimulated the economy when they were implemented

If you honestly think smnall business will start hiring people with tax hikes, you're a complete idiot who bases their opinions onbias & irrational thought processes

When did the Bush tax cuts stimulate the economy? When? Did you not fucking live the past 10 years? You must have since you've been writing such awesome music the past 15 years. Come the fuck on.

[takenflight]

Here's a personal dose of REALITY

I made $75,000 in 2007, the last time the economy was good & Bush was in office...I was hired by United Health in 2006. When big corps were hiringin CONSTANTLY

I got laid off recently in the SAME industry because of the fears that Obama has caused...2009..

Luckily I was resourceful enough to become a broker & have made my living off of commissions (ie, actually getting paid for EARNING money, not sitting on my ass bitching about unemployment benefits not being high enough or long enough)

Thats the difference for me...I really don't need opinions from someone 10 years younger than me, that doesn't know shit about how these corporations respond to tax hikes

If you haven't heard, the unemployment rate is soaring...the highest in a LONG time...

More newTaxes kills jobs, period.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Here's a personal dose of REALITY

I made $75,000 in 2007, the last time the economy was good & Bush was in office...I was hired by United Health in 2006. When big corps were hiringin CONSTANTLY

I got laid off recently in the SAME industry because of the fears that Obama has caused...2009..

Thats the difference for me...I really don't need opinions from someone 10 years younger than me, that doesn't know shit about how these corporations respond to tax hikes

If you haven't heard, the unemployment rate is soaring...the highest in a LONG time...

More newTaxes kills jobs, period.

How old are you? Judging from your band's MySpace page, no one is older than 22. $75k for a young fellow is impressive. If you got laid off, well, that must be because the market answered... a system by which business relied on.

[loveisdead]

Here's a personal dose of REALITY
Your personal situation doesn't represent reality. Even when you capitalize the word.

I made $75,000 in 2007, the last time the economy was good & Bush was in office...I was hired by United Health in 2006. When big corps were hiringin CONSTANTLY
The economy wasn't good (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22912358/) in 2007.
I got laid off recently in the SAME industry because of the fears that Obama has caused...2009..
Then your company is fucking retarded, wouldn't you say?
Thats the difference for me...I really don't need opinions from someone 10 yeats younger than me, that doesn't know shit about how these corporations respond to tax hikes and the consequences felt by Americans...
And you apparently do, with your Fred Thompson quotes and inability to respond to any one of us with even one economic fact besides your own personal life story[spoiler]which no one gives a shit about[/spoiler[
If you haven't heard, the unemployment rate is soaring...the highest in a LONG time...
Yep, and this began because of Bush's policies--read: supply side economics. It's remaining this high for a number of reasons. The recession was worse than anyone expected. Obama had to settle for a smaller-than-necessary stimulus because of retarded deficit hawks. Obama did not make the unemployment rate this high in one and a half years.
More newTaxes kills jobs, plain and simple.
Show me some god damn proof.

[caveBEAR]

:yawn:

[caveBEAR]

Thats the difference for me...I really don't need opinions from someone 10 years younger than me, that doesn't know shit about how these corporations respond to tax hikes

Wait, wha? Who's ten years younger than you?

[takenflight]

How old are you? Judging from your band's MySpace page, no one is older than 22. $75k for a young fellow is impressive. If you got laid off, well, that must because the market answered... a system by which business relied on.

The healthcare bill slashed Medicare Advantage. A program for disabled & seniors that mainly helps the lower-income members get access to better coverage than traditonal medicare. This is truly hypocritical of the left, that claims to "help" the poor.

These cuts hurt millions like myself & hurt the beneficiaries. I wish Obama could see these people and look them in the eyes like I do when I service them and let them know he is cutting their beenfits to help make room for illegals who steal, mug & bring drugs into the country...thats just fucking awesome...

All of this for more government healthcare....Government controlled Medicare is the # 1 denier of claims & with the rationalost Obama nominated to oversee CMS, seniors & disabled can look forward to longer lines & lower quality of care & benefits...The left admitted when they made the cuts that they were fine with taking away vision, dental & hearing from people on medicare...yup..so just leave them deaf, blind & and let their teeth fall out so that the illegal mexicans in Arizona can get Medicaid.

[caveBEAR]

These cuts hurt millions like myself & hurt the beneficiaries. I wish Obama could see these people and look them in the eyes like I do when I service them and let them know he is cutting their beenfits to help make room for illegals who steal, mug & bring drugs into the country...thats just fucking awesome...

Right after you look someone in the eye who went bankrupt because of an illness. Or someone that can't afford to bring their children to the doctor. You know, etc., etc., 'bigger picture you soulless prick', etc.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

The healthcare bill slashed Medicare Advantage. A program for disabled & seniors that mainly helps the lower-income members get access to better coverage than traditonal medicare. This is truly hypocritical of the left, that claims to "help" the poor.

These cuts hurt millions like myself & hurt the beneficiaries. I wish Obama could see these people and look them in the eyes like I do when I service them and let them know he is cutting their beenfits to help make room for illegals who steal, mug & bring drugs into the country...thats just fucking awesome...

All of this for more government healthcare....Government controlled Medicare is the # 1 denier of claims & with the rationalost Obama nominated to oversee CMS, seniors & disabled can look forward to longer lines & lower quality of care & benefits...The left admitted when they made the cuts that they were fine with taking away vision, dental & hearing from people on medicare...yup..so just leave them deaf, blind & and let their teeth fall out so that the illegal mexicans in Arizona can get Medicaid.

I'm just trying to get a handle on your reasoning. You claim that Obama's healthcare reform initiative negatively affected your occupation in 2009, when his healthcare reform was not signed into law until March 23 of this year.

[takenflight]

More people are on Medicare than are uninsured & if you are dying go to the ER, you can't be refused.

And bankrupt because of an illness my ass...You can't get blood out of a stone, if you can't pay your medical bills, don't pay them. I have hospital bills I never paid to this day & it didn't even effect my credit rating when I applied for a new rent.

The new healthbill will have 20 yr olds paying $200 a month for a policy they will likely never use...Nobody will buy that crap, its cheaper to self-insure...

Most people would be fine on a cheap hospital indemnity plan...much cheaper than major medical & betetr for people who are relatively healthy...

Healthy people shoudln't have to pay for sick people's illnesses...When someone eats themselves into type 2 diabetes because they like to pound big macs all day, why should everyone else pay for their gastric bypass surgery?

The solution is to fund free clinics...there is a difference between healthCARE and healthINSURANCE

Surgeons & other specialists should do clinic hours for tax breaks...

iN Green bay we have little stops in wal-mart called "quick-care"...where you can see a doctor for a number of different ailments for less than $70...much cheaper than spending $200 a month for a policy that has a $5,000 deductible you will never meet

[takenflight]

I'm just trying to get a handle on your reasoning. You claim that Obama's healthcare reform initiative negatively affected your occupation in 2009, when his healthcare reform was not signed into law until March 23 of this year.

Ummm...they followed his campaign in 2008...hello...they knew what was coming

[Scrandon]

Here's a personal dose of REALITY

I made $75,000 in 2007, the last time the economy was good & Bush was in office...I was hired by United Health in 2006. When big corps were hiringin CONSTANTLY

I got laid off recently in the SAME industry because of the fears that Obama has caused...2009..
Get your timeline straight, the economy was completely fucked far before Obama took office. Investors and economists began to notice signs as early as 2006.

Thats the difference for me...I really don't need opinions from someone 10 yeats younger than me, that doesn't know shit about how these corporations respond to tax hikes and the consequences felt by Americans...

If you haven't heard, the unemployment rate is soaring...the highest in a LONG time...

More newTaxes kills jobs, period.
Here's the USA, with the second-lowest tax rate (http://www.businesspundit.com/12-countries-with-the-highest-lowest-tax-rates/) in the world for the average worker, and 9.6% unemployment. (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=usa+unemployment+rate)

Meanwhile, the countries with the top six highest tax rates for the average worker are experiencing unemployment rates as follow:
Belgium - 8% (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2874.htm)
Finland - 8.5% (http://www.indexmundi.com/finland/unemployment_rate.html)
Germany - 7.6% (http://www.dailymarkets.com/forex/2010/07/29/germany%E2%80%99s-unemployment-rate-falls-to-the-lowest-level-since-november-2008-3-month-euribor-rate-climbs-to-fresh-yearly-high/)
Denmark - 6.8% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_r ate)
Italy - 8.9% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_r ate)
France - 10% (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/03/04/french-unemployment-rate-jumps-10-percent.html)

Are we doing better, in terms of job growth, than the countries with the highest tax rates in the world? NO!

[takenflight]

Get your timeline straight, the economy was completely fucked far before Obama took office. Investors and economists began to notice signs as early as 2006.

Here's the USA, with the second-lowest tax rate (http://www.businesspundit.com/12-countries-with-the-highest-lowest-tax-rates/) in the world for the average worker, and 9.6% unemployment. (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=usa+unemployment+rate)

Meanwhile, the countries with the top six highest tax rates for the average worker are experiencing unemployment rates as follow:
Belgium - 8% (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2874.htm)
Finland - 8.5% (http://www.indexmundi.com/finland/unemployment_rate.html)
Germany - 7.6% (http://www.dailymarkets.com/forex/2010/07/29/germany%E2%80%99s-unemployment-rate-falls-to-the-lowest-level-since-november-2008-3-month-euribor-rate-climbs-to-fresh-yearly-high/)
Denmark - 6.8% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_r ate)
Italy - 8.9% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_r ate)
France - 10% (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/03/04/french-unemployment-rate-jumps-10-percent.html)

Are we doing better, in terms of job growth, than the countries with the highest tax rates in the world? NO!

I'm comparing unemplyment rates with Bush vs Obama...why are you trying to compare socialist countries with less population, less immigration & more government jobs available percentage wise to the US?

[loveisdead]

I'm comparing unemplyment rates with Bush vs Obama...why are you trying to compare socialist countries with less population, less immigration & more government jobs available percentage wise to the US?

Does the unemployment rate under Obama have anything to do with what happened under Bush?

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Ummm...they followed his campaign in 2008...hello...they knew what was coming

They knew Obama would be president, despite a close race with Clinton in the primaries and then up against McCain? So the market responded to the speculation of an inexperienced Illinois senator with no federal power? And you didn't answer my questions... how old are you?!?!?!?!!?

[Scrandon]

Healthy people shoudln't have to pay for sick people's illnesses...When someone eats themselves into type 2 diabetes because they like to pound big macs all day, why should everyone else pay for their gastric bypass surgery?

Do you not understand basic principles of insurance either?
Safe drivers pay for reckless drivers' accidents and healthy people pay for sick people's treatment.

[takenflight]

Does the unemployment rate under Obama have anything to do with what happened under Bush?

Does it have nothing to do with Obama?

Do you blame Clinton for Bush's problems too?

[Scrandon]

I'm comparing unemplyment rates with Bush vs Obama...why are you trying to compare socialist countries with less population, less immigration & more government jobs available percentage wise to the US?
You said:

More newTaxes kills jobs, period.
You were categorically proven wrong.

Now that post took me around 10 minutes; I'm sure I could similarly prove these wild accusations false, but the truth is, you just don't fucking learn.

[loveisdead]

Does it have nothing to do with Obama?

Do you blame Clinton for Bush's problems too?

Yeah those are totally comparable.

Obama inherited a trillion dollar deficit.

Bush inherited a surplus.

Logic be damned.

[caveBEAR]

:zoom:

[takenflight]

They knew Obama would be president, despite a close race with Clinton in the primaries and then up against McCain? So the market responded to the speculation of an inexperienced Illinois senator with no federal power? And you didn't answer my questions... how old are you?!?!?!?!!?

Obama was in power before I lost my job. I lost it in June 2009 & then again June 2010...I've since become a health/life broker & am also going to work with Auto insurance in a couple months...

Anfd to the poster who made the remark about insurance...we have enough of that going on already...we don't need more of the burden...claims are paid just fine now...if we overflood the system and put caps on how much companies can charge, while eliminating member cost-share, claims won't get paid...

[Scrandon]

Obama was in power before I lost my job. I lost it in June 2009 & then again June 2010...I've since become a health/life broker & am also going to work with Auto insurance in a couple months...

Anfd to the poster who made the remark about insurance...we have enough of that going on already...we don't need more of the burden...claims are paid just fine now...if we overflood the system and put caps on how much companies can charge, while eliminating member cost-share, claims won't get paid...

Stop fucking talking about your life like it matters at all, while we show you that the big picture is not at all what you think it is. Maybe your life just sucks because you are a failure and are unable to comprehend simple arguments and logic.

[caveBEAR]

Have we established how old he is yet? The timeline --> Myspace pictures --> Hints towards age thing is seeming a little odd. :-|

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Obama was in power before I lost my job. I lost it in June 2009 & then again June 2010...I've since become a health/life broker & am also going to work with Auto insurance in a couple months...

Anfd to the poster who made the remark about insurance...we have enough of that going on already...we don't need more of the burden...claims are paid just fine now...if we overflood the system and put caps on how much companies can charge, while eliminating member cost-share, claims won't get paid...

How old are you?!?!?

[Scrandon]

His whole "Insurance is bullshit" attitude is pretty odd as well, considering the industry supports him.

[Scrandon]

How old are you?!?!?

He's obviously not very good with numbers, regardless of how simple they may be.

I'm sure he feels about 35, you know, with his gut.

[saysmydoctor]

Fred Thompson?

Really? Fred Thompson?

[GeeBee]

Anfd to the poster who made the remark about insurance...we have enough of that going on already...we don't need more of the burden...claims are paid just fine now...if we overflood the system and put caps on how much companies can charge, while eliminating member cost-share, claims won't get paid...

Do people still trust you to handle their insurance affairs after they've seen you/heard your band?

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Fred Thompson?

Really? Fred Thompson?

I know, right? He was in Die Hard 2, everyone's least favorite of the franchise.

[illicitpopsicle]

Takenflight is a troll, he's posted the same bullshit up on another site (http://www.revleft.com/vb/you-make-me-t139137/index.html) and it looks like there's no sign of him giving up. As for this guy's band, my lead singer is 17, and he writes better lyrics (at least, ostensibly. I will admit that I'm biased). Just sayin' bro. Maybe it's time to focus a little bit more on the insurance salesmanship rather than the band.

Also, hi all. I'm obviously new.

[GeeBee]

Takenflight is a troll, he's posted the same bullshit up on another site (http://www.revleft.com/vb/you-make-me-t139137/index.html) and it looks like there's no sign of him giving up. As for this guy's band, my lead singer is 17, and he writes better lyrics (at least, ostensibly. I will admit that I'm biased). Just sayin' bro. Maybe it's time to focus a little bit more on the insurance salesmanship rather than the band.

Also, hi all. I'm obviously new.

Thanks for the heads up.
Welcome.

[loveisdead]

Takenflight is a troll, he's posted the same bullshit up on another site (http://www.revleft.com/vb/you-make-me-t139137/index.html) and it looks like there's no sign of him giving up. As for this guy's band, my lead singer is 17, and he writes better lyrics (at least, ostensibly. I will admit that I'm biased). Just sayin' bro. Maybe it's time to focus a little bit more on the insurance salesmanship rather than the band.

Also, hi all. I'm obviously new.

Thanks man. I think we'll call this thread a day then.