Congratulations U.S. Members - Page 2

Thunder22 · #1 11-08-2006, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaefer

Well, for its flaws, our form of goverment is the oldest democracy in the world -- this despite the fact that we are a very young nation.

You got any better ideas? Or is this only driven by the fact that your party is no longer in power. Funny how that works. I am not a liberal per se, but I am a registered democrat. Though unhappy about the situation over the past six years, I simply accepted the fact that the Republicans were chosen by the majority of the voting population to run the country. That's what happens in a democracy. (To say nothing of the fact that Bush probably stole the 2000 election.) The Reds had their time, and they blew it. Now, the electorate has again spoken and given the Blues a chance. Maybe you should simply accept that -- just as I did for the past few years.

No, it's not perfect, but it's pretty damn good. I can't think of a single superpower in history that was (or still is, for that matter) as democratic as ours.

OR... you can mount a campaign to re-write our constitution, re-work our electorate process, and revamp our democratic checks-and-balances system. Let me know how that goes.

Juan

What party are you assuming that i'm a member of? I've never said, nor have I defended either side, I'm an equal opportunity hater of politics and politicians.

In reference to your last paragraph, again, I wasn't bashing the system, I am bashing the morons that we currently have to choose from, and the manner in which Americans cast their vote, i.e. their decision making process.

I am seriously questioning, and still waiting for a coherent answer other than "anything but the republicans would be better", what the the Dems plans are. In detail. Saying "stop the war" is b.s., everyone wants to get out of Iraq, HOW will the dems do it differently? Healthcare? everyone wants better more affordable healthcare, how will the dems do it differently? they've already failed at it miserably back when Hillary was running the country in the 90's, what are they going to do differently? and if they have the answer, why haven't they proposed it since clinton left office? waiting for the right moment?

When someone gives me a well thought out, backed up by references answer to this question, I think we'll all be better off.

You can choose to disagree with how i feel, that's your prerogative, but don't waste your time trying to sway me to the other side nor convince me that i'm wrong. I'm no more right or wrong than you are, we just differ in opinion.

Scottie · #2 11-08-2006, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaefer

Well, for its flaws, our form of goverment is the oldest democracy in the world -- this despite the fact that we are a very young nation.

Juan

you sure about that

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...e+Search&meta=

maybe your the world’s oldest modern democracy

E61Silver · #3 11-09-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

It's not a moot point juan.

No plan is worse than a bad plan. It's that simple.

To use an analogy, how is anyone better off by deciding to walk into a dark cave instead of climb down a dark hole?

This isn't a Dems vs. Republicans debate, it's a shitty political party vs. the other shitty political party discussion.

As Americans, we should be demanding a better government, not a different government because the one that is in power is disliked.

Hoping for a "good politician" is like praying not to have a hangover over drinking liter of vodka, sure it's possible, but not probable.

I think you must be the only one that does not get it, we need a change in plan regarding the war. Even Bush understands and fired Rumsfeld.

This does not mean anyone knows a exact plan today; but stay the course is not working! Bush got us into a huge mess and any plan will take time a cooperation. Bush lunch plans today show that he understands the need for cooperation. Hopefully the country will move ahead and both parties will work together.

Deuce · #4 11-09-2006, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by x54.4blue

I think you must be the only one that does not get it, we need a change in plan regarding the war. Even Bush understands and fired Rumsfeld.

This does not mean anyone knows a exact plan today; but stay the course is not working! Bush got us into a huge mess and any plan will take time a cooperation. Bush lunch plans today show that he understands the need for cooperation. Hopefully the country will move ahead and both parties will work together.

In a choice between Republicans' "Stay until we win" Iraq policy or the Democrats' "Stay, leave ... stay for a while then leave ... redeploy and then come back ... leave and stay ... cut and run ... win, lose or draw policy," I prefer the Republican policy.

E61Silver · #5 11-08-2006, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaefer

As opposed to what, Ron? The "stellar" Republican plan that has cost the lives of almost 3,000 troops, has uncovered NOT ONE single WMD, and has thrown Iraq to the verge of civil war? Oh yeah... Osama is still at large, and the Taliban are again fighting in Afghanistan.

Winner of a plan...

During all of this, our government has grown to be the largest (fattest) under ANY president (so much for small government), and we have racked up the biggest deficit in our history (so much for being fiscally responsible).

Look, whether the dems have a better (or any plan at all) is truly a moot point. What the electorate did yesterday was send a message: "We don't like what you're doing. It's not working. Get out!" If the dems do not deliver, they too, will be thrown out in '08. Like it or not, that's the way our democracy works. I, for one, hope we get this mess straightened out. The administration will be forced to actually negotiate and find common ground -- in other words, be good politicians <gasp!>. The days of the rubber-stamping of bills are over. At least for two years.

Happy and proud to be part of the American electorate.

Juan

It seems that even Bush must of heard and fired Rumsfeld

Eric5273 · #6 11-08-2006, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

I reiterate my question from the other thread:

Can you articulate what the Democrats plans are? and I mean in detail, not just "we're not republicans" and "anyone but Bush", those are moronic messages, i'm curious as to what exacly we're in store for, and for the life of me I can't find 1 democrat who has clearly and concisely detailed how they will acheive this great "change".

*waits patiently

From what I have seen, you have your liberal democrats like Nancy Pelosi, and then you have your more moderate ones. Many of the newly elected democrats seem to be more moderate, so I have no idea what their agenda is. The liberal agenda of the leadership (Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi) would be the following:

1) Immediate withdrawal from Iraq

2) Suspend Bush's tax cuts for the top tax bracket only

3) Increase the minimum wage

4) Pass an addendum bill to last year's medicaid bill allowing the government to use collective bargaining with the drug companies just as the private insurance companies do, instead of having to pay full retail price for all drugs as the current law states

5) Pass some sort of national health insurance plan. I've seen many ideas here, so who knows what they will decide to do. I haven't seen any concrete structure to what this would be.

6) Large cuts in corporate welfare including all the no bid rebuilding and military service contracts for Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans. (#4 also overlaps into this corporate welfare category)

#2, 4 & 6 alone would yield enough savings to balance the Federal budget and probably give a healthy surpluss that can be spent on some sort of national health plan.

And then there is foreign policy which needs a complete overhaul. I won't even discuss that here....

Thunder22 · #7 11-08-2006, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

From what I have seen, you have your liberal democrats like Nancy Pelosi, and then you have your more moderate ones. Many of the newly elected democrats seem to be more moderate, so I have no idea what their agenda is. The liberal agenda of the leadership (Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi) would be the following:

1) Immediate withdrawal from Iraq

2) Suspend Bush's tax cuts for the top tax bracket only

3) Increase the minimum wage

4) Pass an addendum bill to last year's medicaid bill allowing the government to use collective bargaining with the drug companies just as the private insurance companies do, instead of having to pay full retail price for all drugs as the current law states

5) Pass some sort of national health insurance plan. I've seen many ideas here, so who knows what they will decide to do. I haven't seen any concrete structure to what this would be.

6) Large cuts in corporate welfare including all the no bid rebuilding and military service contracts for Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans. (#4 also overlaps into this corporate welfare category)

#2, 4 & 6 alone would yield enough savings to balance the Federal budget and probably give a healthy surpluss that can be spent on some sort of national health plan.

And then there is foreign policy which needs a complete overhaul. I won't even discuss that here....

1. There isn't 1 democrat who has said this. please provide a source.
2. This will stall the economy. see definition of inflation running wild.
3. big deal.
4. i agree.
5. they tried that already, see Hillary as First Lady, failed miserably. will result in higher taxes (you're getting closer, at least the higher taxes have a reason)
6. the dems are just as corrupt as the republicans in this area. see clinton era.

so far, you're 1 for 6.

what else ya got?

Eric5273 · #8 11-08-2006, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

1. There isn't 1 democrat who has said this. please provide a source.

Here is one. There are many others as well.

Murtha calls for immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq

As for your comment of me being "1 for 6", I don't care if you agree with what the liberal platform is. You asked what it is, and I am telling you.

As for "what else", there are many foreign policy issues. The liberal agenda would include the following:

1. More active cooperation with global treaties such as Kyoto Protocol and the World Court.

2. Withdrawal of troops and closure of military bases from many of the 130+ countries we currently have American military bases in.

3. Disband President Bush's program to develop a new class of tactical nuclear weapons in violation of the NPT.

4. Closure of the Guantanamo prison and all other secret prisons

5. Disband the NSA domestic spy program

6. Eliminate military aid to non-democratic countries such as Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and others

7. Economic sanctions against countries with major human rights violations such as Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, Niger, Burma, and others

8. Elimination of economic embargo and sactions against Cuba

There's probably some more that I cannot think of right now.

Thunder22 · #9 11-08-2006, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Here is one. There are many others as well.

Murtha calls for immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq

As for your comment of me being "1 for 6", I don't care if you agree with what the liberal platform is. You asked what it is, and I am telling you.

As for "what else", there are many foreign policy issues. The liberal agenda would include the following:

1. More active cooperation with global treaties such as Kyoto Protocol and the World Court.

2. Withdrawal of troops and closure of military bases from many of the 130+ countries we currently have American military bases in.

3. Disband President Bush's program to develop a new class of tactical nuclear weapons in violation of the NPT.

4. Closure of the Guantanamo prison and all other secret prisons

5. Disband the NSA domestic spy program

6. Eliminate military aid to non-democratic countries such as Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and others

7. Economic sanctions against countries with major human rights violations such as Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, Niger, Burma, and others

8. Elimination of economic embargo and sactions against Cuba

There's probably some more that I cannot think of right now.

I can't believe that you don't see the negative sides to all of that.

Do you really support all of those initiatives? Do you not see the negative side of each? I seriously hope not, because almost every single one of them would hurt the US.

re: Murtha's "call to leave immediately", what do you think will happen in Iraq if tomorrow the US military is just "gone"? obviously, murtha is not saying "leave this second", there would be a staged/planned withdrawal. Which the republicans are in favor of as well, so how does this differ from their plan? what good did it do to vote in the dems?

DINANM3 · #10 11-08-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

From what I have seen, you have your liberal democrats like Nancy Pelosi, and then you have your more moderate ones. Many of the newly elected democrats seem to be more moderate, so I have no idea what their agenda is. The liberal agenda of the leadership (Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi) would be the following:

1) Immediate withdrawal from Iraq

2) Suspend Bush's tax cuts for the top tax bracket only

3) Increase the minimum wage

4) Pass an addendum bill to last year's medicaid bill allowing the government to use collective bargaining with the drug companies just as the private insurance companies do, instead of having to pay full retail price for all drugs as the current law states

5) Pass some sort of national health insurance plan. I've seen many ideas here, so who knows what they will decide to do. I haven't seen any concrete structure to what this would be.

6) Large cuts in corporate welfare including all the no bid rebuilding and military service contracts for Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans. (#4 also overlaps into this corporate welfare category)

#2, 4 & 6 alone would yield enough savings to balance the Federal budget and probably give a healthy surpluss that can be spent on some sort of national health plan.

And then there is foreign policy which needs a complete overhaul. I won't even discuss that here....

I have a serious problem with # 2. Im in that tax bracket.
Why should I pay a higher percent in Taxes than anyone else. Its not fair. I worked extremely hard to get to where I am and why should I be penalized for it. I put almost 20 years of schooling to get my double business degree and MBA. I put in 60 to 80 hours of work in a week every week. Why do I have to pay more taxes than anyone else does. Its bullshit. You think I should be penalized because I worked and still work my fucking ass off. Give me a break.

On top of that the more the govnt taxes me the less money I will have to reinvest in my companies and make them grow and hire more employees. So that is less jobs I can provide. Last year I saved 60k in taxes as a direct result of tax laws the rebublicans passed. I used that plus some of my own cash to start yet another business and created 6 more jobs on top of the 100 or so employees I already employ. The employees count on me and others like me to provide them with good secure jobs. Now if im taxed to death and I go out of business its not just me out of a job. Its over 100 people out of a job. How do you justify that. I believe tax burdens should be equal and fair. There are many more things I would like to say here but I wont bother.