91 posts
Thats real sweet. Problem is, when it failed, did he try again? Did he work with congress to get a budget passed? Or, did he propose this budget knowing it would fail just to cover the ass? Did he spend a year to to get a budget passed? It's pretty damn important to have a budget. No. He moved on to healthcare. So, he passed that law, without us knowing what was in it as he promised he wouldn't do, not knowing if he could even afford the goddamn thing. Cart before the horse. This car is so great, I'll buy it. I'm approved for the loan. I'll worry about paying for it later. I must be able to make the payment. They approved me for the loan.
Complete irresponsible action taken by Obama and there is no excuse for no budget when we have the kind of debt we have. Period.
Why do you want the president to mollycoddle the legislative branch into doing it's function?
Why do you ignore the fact that Obama didn't get a budget passed in 4 years with a deficit and debt out of this world and spent money not knowing if he had or not? The debt is more important than the healthcare spending because you're not supposed to spend money before considering the small little fact that you have no money and probably can't pay the bill..... without more credit, I mean debt.
I would be happy if Obama spent the entire first year as President getting a budget passed over this expense of healthcare.
Hookbender — Nov 08, 2012[quote author=Tripper link=1351211112/25#44 date=1352177512][quote author=Hookbender link=1351211112/25#43 date=1352170095]19 out of 20 chance..... very doubtful. That's my point. At least one of them. Another is that government stats are very questionable, in my opinion.
And we all know you're an expert. :)
If you make 50k a year, even 40k, that isn't exactly suffering.
It is if you're living in a place with a very high cost of living.
Perspective... :)
Tripper
I never claimed to be an expert and your post at times claims you to be an ass hole. Your damn sure not an expert.
My post isn't a sentient being. It can't claim anything. It might REVEAL me to be an asshole (one word), but you already know that about me. I was just giving you shit because you always act like you know what you're talking about, and almost never really do. It's pretty funny.
If your suffering making 50k a year, fucking time to move. If you don't move, don't bitch. It's choice.
True, I guess. I mean, we all can afford to just walk away from our lives where we live and get a similar-paying job somewhere else where we have no support network. It's a piece of cake. Oh, wait...
You sit here and tell me there is a 19 in 20 chance in getting a job with a college education is bullshit and you know it. I, 'll tell you there is a 100% chance of getting a job with effort.
I don't tell you anything. Charger did. But I have a college education. I have a job in my chosen field, so count me in the 19.
You know I love you baby... ;)
Tripper
Hookbender — Nov 09, 2012Why do you ignore the fact that Obama didn't get a budget passed in 4 years with a deficit and debt out of this world and spent money not knowing if he had or not? The debt is more important than the healthcare spending because you're not supposed to spend money before considering the small little fact that you have no money and probably can't pay the bill..... without more credit, I mean debt.
I would be happy if Obama spent the entire first year as President getting a budget passed over this expense of healthcare.
Do the words "OBSTRUCTIONIST CONGRESS" mean anything to you? No budget was happening no matter what President Obama did. I think if you'd been paying closer attention to reliable news sources you might know that already.
;)
Tripper
Hookbender... the House voted to overturn Obamacare 53 times. I guess they were too busy doing that to pass a budget that would get any bipartisan support.
The worst part of this is they targeted those moves at the kind of lock&stock Republicans who would look at them and say, wow, the House is trying really hard, it's all Obama's fault.
And you bought it.
I don't consider you low-information, but more than a few times now you've seemed to have "facts" that are at odds with the actual "facts". I have to wonder how much of this you have actually researched, and how much you just get from Fox News or the Drudge Report or something. Because I'm not hearing any sort of factual basis to anything you say.
The budget is the tip of the iceberg--you've had similar arguments about the need for healthcare, you don't believe unemployment statistics. Hell, even with the mounds of evidence we've posted, you still doubt global warming has a man-made component. Don't go the way of so many of your Republican brethren, as they venture further and further from facts and make themselves increasingly irrelevant.
The tide isn't turning in this country. It has turned.
You can't do what the idiot side of the Republican party is doing, and blame this on everyone who voted for Obama being stupid or duped. Because the truth is, we're not. A lot of very smart people worked for Obama, a lot of very smart people voted for Obama, and he's delivered a clear victory twice now. A lot of us can see the progress he's made. We haven't been duped into anything. We HAVE looked at the numbers, the facts, and the reality of the situation. Republicans seem to think they don't have the right candidate. Yeah, sure, maybe somebody under 65 who isn't a quarter billionaire would be a good change, but also? The message needs to change. The Republicans increasingly understand only a very small portion of America, and that portion is aging, and becoming a minority.
Get on the right side of history, or at least get yourself a little educated on the FACTS of the issues (not the talking points). No one needs to hear a Fox News rehash here. They have their own channel which I watch quite a bit, and I'm well aware of their nasty, increasingly irrelevant line of bullshit. I'd like to hear a little more thoughtfulness from Republicans. Some ideas to work with the president, to move the country forward, instead of presenting themselves as a block against the future, which is coming in like an unavoidable tide. Look at Mark McKinnon, who worked on McCain's campaign-- one voice in the wilderness. He considers himself "the progressive wing of the Republican party" which is also "a very lonely group." But that guy sees some reality, and has some ideas. Dump the Tea Party. They were the ugly date you woke up with after a bad night of drinking in 2010, and now you're just staying with them because you can't figure out how to get your keys back. Reclaim the party for what is really in America now, look at reality a little. It's not time to tell everyone else they are idiots for choosing Obama. It's time to look at why your own party is such a godawful, irredeemable mess that a majority of Americans just cannot accept.
Trip
I can't respond to such a wide general sweeping allegation. You'll have to show me what your talking about.
I don't think I know a whole lot about politics. I do know for a fact that we haven't had a budget in at least 5 years and we damn well need one. Especially now. You can make all the excuses you want for Obama, doesn't change the facts.
I would love our voting process to determine the winner of these elections by simply counting the votes and the one with the most wins. That is a opinion, doesn't require any evidence.
Most of my political post are opinions. I don't care if you like them or not, but arguments against my opinions are welcome.
Same for you Charger. Wide sweeping allegations. Can't respond to what I guess you mean. Be a little more specific.
Oh now there's been no budget in 5 years? That Obama! What a dick. Reaching back in time before his administration and not passing a budget.
BTW, Obama won the popular vote, too... did you miss that? By 3 million votes and counting.
What's wide and sweeping about this? These are three specific instances where you've discarded facts and/or science:
The budget is the tip of the iceberg--you've had similar arguments about the need for healthcare, you don't believe unemployment statistics. Hell, even with the mounds of evidence we've posted, you still doubt global warming has a man-made component.
These, interestingly enough, are all also things that many prominent Republicans don't believe.
charger — Nov 10, 2012Oh now there's been no budget in 5 years? That Obama! What a dick. Reaching back in time before his administration and not passing a budget.
BTW, Obama won the popular vote, too... did you miss that? By 3 million votes and counting.
What's wide and sweeping about this? These are three specific instances where you've discarded facts and/or science:
The budget is the tip of the iceberg--you've had similar arguments about the need for healthcare, you don't believe unemployment statistics. Hell, even with the mounds of evidence we've posted, you still doubt global warming has a man-made component.
These, interestingly enough, are all also things that many prominent Republicans don't believe.
Alright. Read this.
"And all these people should be held accountable for their actions. There is no excuse for government, in as bad shape as its ever been in, to be allowed to operate without a budget. Ever. We've been without one for I think 5 years now. I don't thing Bush had one his final year, or maybe even 2 years. Thats just irresponsible."
This is my post in this thread. I'm also bitching about congress in this thread. I also said I wasn't assigning blame by voting for Romney. Blame on Obama.
I know Obama won the popular vote. Duh.
I don't think 19 out of 20 graduates will get a job in their field of study. I am skeptical about any government stats. Thats just me. Call it what you want. I really don't care. And what the hell are you talking about with global warming? Show me what I said to give you this conclusion. Lets take the unemployment rate for example. Does that include people that are not looking for jobs? No. So, 7.9 unemployment rate is not accurate.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/05/29/3-lies-about-jobs-and-the-unemployment-rate
You don't read my post. You just ignore what I say and inject whatever you wish I said, I guess. Bullshit allegations based on nothing I've said. I think you can do better than that. In fact, I know you can do better. My opinions are reasonable. Just not what you want to hear.
Does it look like I know what I'm talking about in this post? Jeez.
Hook
The fact is that Charger and I both DO read your posts. We address them directly on a frequent basis and point out any disagreements we have with your statements, often provide either alternative commentary which is often supported by some evidence in the form of links to information, and I admit I occasionally just throw some insults in there to entertain myself.
To act as though you need specific evidence to see our point for our last few statements (which aren't all that broad or sweeping, actually) just proves our point. You haven't been paying very close attention.
And my opinion? Your Romney vote was nothing but a reactionary vote. It wasn't based on real policy or understanding of facts. It was based on an obvious personal disdain for the president, which we have pointed out might not have much of a basis in the reality of the way he has governed. You've been yelling at the empty chair for THREE YEARS now, and frankly, it's tired as fuck. Both Charger and I have our issues with some things President Obama has done, but we refuse to ignore the good things just because there have been a few unfulfilled (as yet) promises.
I think we've been fair presenting the positives and negatives of both candidates, and in my opinion the right one won. He's more capable, more experienced, and has better ideas. Now, if he isn't stonewalled by Congress (which will just show us even more they care far more about party than country), you're going to be surprised at how well the next four years will go.
Just my take.
Tripper
Your not being "fair" if you don't really read my post. You actually don't know how I feel about Obama, himself, because you never asked.
I really don't mind Obama winning. Him, as President, is ok with me. However, congress isn't going to let him do whatever he wants to do. It will probably be the same as the last 4 years. That means our country will be stuck where it is. I haven't really blamed Obama for much other than the budget. That is his fault, imo. It's not like he didn't have a budget for a year, that may be excusable to a degree, but not 4 years. That is irresponsible and there is no excuse for that.
Yeah, I do ignore some things. Like your speculation about how Romney would be another Bush. You really don't no that. Even Obama has done some things exactly like Bush. He wasn't all that bad a President. You and the liberals just keep spitting out the same crap as MSMBC about how the meltdown of the economy and all thats happened is Bush's fault. Thats just not true.
I do not like Obamacare. I don't blame Obama for trying to improve healthcare, I just don't think his way is the way. I don't like the money our government spends, but that goes for any President, not just Obama. I think it's time we accepted that fact, you know, that we are broke as hell and have to much debt to spend as we usually do. Obama hasn't done a horrible job at spending, but the government is so out of control that even the better job he's done is a failure.
Your accusations that I have a dislike of Obama is just false. I don't like some things he's done and I voice them. I really don't like you and Chargers defense of Obama, especially when there isn't one. So, I just ignore it.
Obama isn't a bad President, he just has no help from congress in getting anything done. Thats the main reason I voted for Romney. Our country is more important than my desires for Obama to be President. I think that Romney would have sparked the economy and more conservative economic policies would have been an advantage our economy needs right now. So again, your opinion of why I voted for Romney is wrong.
And Obama has more experience only because he's been President for the last 4 years. When he was elected he had way less experience than Romney across the board. Thats just a piss pore statement that means nothing. Obamas experience, LOL, give me a break.
Thats my take.
I get it now...
It's too bad you still don't.
Tripper
No. I really think you don't get it. But that's ok, I've been where you are right now. :)
Look up the failures with Project ORCA, Romney's amazing, high-tech get-out-the-vote app that crashed an burned miserably on election day.
Look up the fact that Romney's team completely discarded science, looked at all the polls, and "readjusted" them to what their "gut feeling" told them was the actual science of who would turn out to vote on election day. This led the Romney team to be completely shocked, completely caught off guard by the results of the election.
Sure, these are micro issues. But to me, they point to a much larger macro issue that team Romney had. The lack of any science, any data, any rigorous investigation of the numbers. This complete lack of understanding of modern technology and modern science is the same reason team Romney spent so much time trying to deflect questions from their budgeting numbers, couldn't show us a plan, etc. Because these people don't believe in science. They believe in a conservative philosophy. "Put me in charge, I've got a philosophy on my side, that you cut taxes, you remove regulations, you cut entitlements, you drill and frack and dig anywhere and everywhere for fossil fuels, and the economy booms. And if all else fails, god is on my side."
It was a weak approach mostly founded on bullshit.
Obama may be a lot of things but he's not full of crap. He believes the science. He takes a long term view. And he's pragmatic above all else.
I think I may vomit.
You think Obama can't count high enough to understand the massive number that equals our massive debt?
I wouldn't mention numbers when defending Obama. Thats just me. He isn't full of crap but some of his adds have been proven lies? Amazing. Simply amazing.
Our national debt is 16 trillion. It was revealed that the banks got 16 trillion. Oh those ones n' zeroz, they come with different raaaaaaates!!!
Once again:
http://youtu.be/7DX9T6A4lskYou should look at the imaginary sums the derivative boys work with...
You smoke to much or something. :D
Nal, I wish. Just "tired of hearing about the deficit"/debt, like Bill was many moons ago...
The debt, deficit we have now is Obamas. So sorry. The fact/science, of that is we have no budget now or in the last 4 + years. And it increasing shows that we haven't made much attempt to resolve that. Obama's lap.
The debt/deficit is what they use to scare the masses. They made it and they will now use it. Letz see what they change to deal wif it...
Seruss tho, look into those derivatives if you really wanna get scared. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Hookbender — Nov 13, 2012I think I may vomit.
You think Obama can't count high enough to understand the massive number that equals our massive debt?
I wouldn't mention numbers when defending Obama. Thats just me. He isn't full of crap but some of his adds have been proven lies? Amazing. Simply amazing.
Reread my post. I didn't mention any numbers. I was talking about team Romney's disavowal of all facts in the election cycle. You always turn back to the same talking point, over and over. "The debt". "No budget" I showed earlier where that debt came from. You've definitely learned in your years on this earth that Congress enacts budgets. You may as well blame the Greek crisis on Obama too.
I like the part where it's BamBam's debt now...and it'll be the next guy's too! Rinse and repeat...
It's our debt. President doesn't own the debt. President does own specific failures. You're calling it Obama's failure to not reduce spending. But Congress voted on all of that spending, and every one of those continuing resolutions, and except for 72 days, Congress has been either bipartisan, or controlled by Republicans. It's the least successful Congress in history, held hostage to a bunch of idiots from the Tea Party, which I'm still pretty much convinced would not exist was Obama white.
The Teeze party was a Ron Paul supporting group that got bought out by many of the same people/groups who wasted millions on Romney. I don't doubt that race played some role in their "rise to power" in the House but the funding seemed to be the major factor and calls the shots. We'll see where they go now that getting something done seems to be a priority...
charger — Nov 13, 2012[quote author=Hookbender link=1351211112/50#67 date=1352772976]I think I may vomit.
You think Obama can't count high enough to understand the massive number that equals our massive debt?
I wouldn't mention numbers when defending Obama. Thats just me. He isn't full of crap but some of his adds have been proven lies? Amazing. Simply amazing.
Reread my post. I didn't mention any numbers. I was talking about team Romney's disavowal of all facts in the election cycle. You always turn back to the same talking point, over and over. "The debt". "No budget" I showed earlier where that debt came from. You've definitely learned in your years on this earth that Congress enacts budgets. You may as well blame the Greek crisis on Obama too.
My bad on the numbers thing. Not sure what I was thinking.
I don't care where the debt came from, I just want it reduced.
charger — Nov 13, 2012It's our debt. President doesn't own the debt. President does own specific failures. You're calling it Obama's failure to not reduce spending. But Congress voted on all of that spending, and every one of those continuing resolutions, and except for 72 days, Congress has been either bipartisan, or controlled by Republicans. It's the least successful Congress in history, held hostage to a bunch of idiots from the Tea Party, which I'm still pretty much convinced would not exist was Obama white.
The President owns whether or not he reduces the debt or raises the debt. Just like Clinton got credit. Bush got negative credit. So, I'm afraid Obama gets credit as well. Credit for doing nothing to secure a budget for 4 years. 4 years in office with no budget puts your congress argument in the trash real quick like.
Right now, after his first 4 years in office or even after the 8th year, is to early to judge whether he's a good or bad President. I think he was above average, to be fair. So far. But that's just because our country could be in way worse shape than it is. He is doing something right.
Maybe he'll do a bang up job this next 4 years. I really hope he does. I'm pulling for him.
I do think this Obamacare thing will cripple anything he does, but we'll see.
The simple fact is only one president since 1980 has reduced the debt. I expect that Obama will try hard to increase taxes this time, and I suspect he'll get to a decent level of deficit reduction, while being mindful of keeping us out of recession. I don't think anyone wants us to go Spain and cut the crap out of the budget, and end up with 25% unemployment, or go Greece, where three successive austerity budgets have made life harsh.
Here's some interesting perspective:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
What about Obama? Notice how the debt accelerated during Bush's last two budget years. Obama's debt is a continuation of that trend and neither Bush nor Obama are directly responsible for that acceleration. It happened because of the recession. Bush set the all-time record by increasing the debt by $1.1 trillion in 100 days between July 30 and Nov 9, 2008but that had little to do with his choices.
Recessions cut tax revenuesin this case, dramatically. That accounts for nearly half of the deficit. So blaming Obama for the full deficit is like blaming him for not raising the tax rate to keep tax revenues up. Most of the increased spending is automatic increases in unemployment benefits, food stamps, and social security payments for early retirement. Very little of it is from stimulus spending, and that's over.
We don't have a budget to cut the crap out of. We haven't had one in 4 years. You don't pay attention to facts very well.
And again, this isn't about blaming Obama for the deficit.
Thats the last time I'm telling you that.
Hookbender — Nov 14, 2012We don't have a budget to cut the crap out of. We haven't had one in 4 years. You don't pay attention to facts very well.
And again, this isn't about blaming Obama for the deficit.
Thats the last time I'm telling you that.
You are way off on this. You voted for Bush twice. Bush
never passed a full budget. The last Congress to sign a full budget was in
1997, under Clinton. You are way out of your depth on this topic, don't really understand it at all, but you keep coming back to it and harping on it. As if this is some sort of new horrible condition of our federal budgeting system wrought by Obama.
Wake up.
Is it normal for Congress not to pass a federal budget?
Unfortunately, yes. It turns out that we're a pugilistic people by nature, and when you put money into the mix, things just escalate like a Gambino family reunion. The last time that we had a full-on, real-life federal budget that was signed into law, it was 1997. Bill Clinton was president, and Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House (and only on his second wife).
http://prospect.org/article/does-congress-even-need-pass-budget
"You are way off on this. You voted for Bush twice. Bush never passed a full budget. The last Congress to sign a full budget was in 1997, under Clinton. You are way out of your depth on this topic, don't really understand it at all, but you keep coming back to it and harping on it. As if this is some sort of new horrible condition of our federal budgeting system wrought by Obama. "
How am I way off? Because I voted for Bush? Don't tell me I'm way off in the same thread you either misinterpreted what I said, or just took what you wanted from what I said, or something. ;D
Your correct. I have much to learn about politics and government. Thats for sure.
Actually, the budget, debt, or deficit never crossed my mind much. Even when voting. What perked my interest is the lack of a budget by Bush Jr his last 2 years in office. Why then? Because they bitched about it on the news for 2 years, while he was in office. So I had to read about it then to get a basic understanding of how it worked. Wonder what I was watching to get that info? If you said Fox news, you'd be wrong.
OK. This is the last time I'm saying this, again. ;D
I am not blaming that on Obama. I never did. It would help if you could put the idea that I don't like Obama on the shelf when you read my post. I'll try this with you. Show me where I blamed Obama for our debt and deficit. Show me! Please!
I think you need to be fair enough to let me answer your questions head on rather than pre-judging what I'm saying before you read my post. I mean a full sentence, even, apparently. An accusation is just that until proven to be true with evidence of some kind. Did Obama claim he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term? He's a little off his goal. One would think the deficit was kinda important to Obama, at least until he got in office. I guess he was way over his head on this subject as well. At least I'm with a guy that drinks beer. ;D
Repeat... last time an actual budget was passed was 1997. It's 2012. That's 15 years ago. This is not, at this point, something unusual. This is the new normal.
Remember 1997?
Google didn't exist yet.
Princess Diana died that year.
Yeah, it's been that long.
Blame, blame Obama.
I also blamed Bush. Your having sex with Obama, aren't you? :D
Your argument doesn't excuse Obama from doing his job, which in part, is presenting a budget to congress and seeing that it gets passed. It would have been way better for our country if he spent his first year in office taking care of that aspect of his job instead of fucking up healthcare and our economy because people don't know what to expect from this huge change in the system. Spending money without a budget is no different than giving a 16 year old a credit card with no limit and telling him to watch how much money he spends. It's completely irresponsible. Apparently, voters don't give a shit how much money our government spends no matter how far in debt we are. That's pitiful. Our government will continue to spend until we demand it stop. If voters don't hold the President accountable, I guess I'm on a island by myself howling at the damn moon.
Little side note. We have lost our AAA credit rating for the first time since 1941. Why? In part because of our massive debt. I'm sure you know the consequences of that, especially if it drops again as once expected.
Hookbender — Nov 15, 2012I also blamed Bush. Your having sex with Obama, aren't you? :D
Your argument doesn't excuse Obama from doing his job, which in part, is presenting a budget to congress and seeing that it gets passed. It would have been way better for our country if he spent his first year in office taking care of that aspect of his job instead of fucking up healthcare and our economy because people don't know what to expect from this huge change in the system. Spending money without a budget is no different than giving a 16 year old a credit card with no limit and telling him to watch how much money he spends. It's completely irresponsible. Apparently, voters don't give a shit how much money our government spends no matter how far in debt we are. That's pitiful. Our government will continue to spend until we demand it stop. If voters don't hold the President accountable, I guess I'm on a island by myself howling at the damn moon.
Little side note. We have lost our AAA credit rating for the first time since 1941. Why? In part because of our massive debt. I'm sure you know the consequences of that, especially if it drops again as once expected.
We lost our credit rating because Republicans decided to make an issue of raising the debt ceiling limit, something they never had a problem with when the president was a Republican. S&P specifically called out the inability for Republicans to compromise when they downgraded us.
You know this, we've even discussed it here, and yet you still march it out as Obama's fault. You're like a broken record.
It's over, Obama won. Suck it up. And he won despite the best efforts of the Republican establishment to burn him down and raze the country in the process. I, for one, hope they suffer for the rest of time. The party sucks, it's message sucks, it's politicians suck, and it's fringe wing is a bunch of assholes, and if they never win another election for president and lose influence, I think that can only be a good thing for our country.
charger — Nov 19, 2012[quote author=Hookbender link=1351211112/75#84 date=1353017881]I also blamed Bush. Your having sex with Obama, aren't you? :D
Your argument doesn't excuse Obama from doing his job, which in part, is presenting a budget to congress and seeing that it gets passed. It would have been way better for our country if he spent his first year in office taking care of that aspect of his job instead of fucking up healthcare and our economy because people don't know what to expect from this huge change in the system. Spending money without a budget is no different than giving a 16 year old a credit card with no limit and telling him to watch how much money he spends. It's completely irresponsible. Apparently, voters don't give a shit how much money our government spends no matter how far in debt we are. That's pitiful. Our government will continue to spend until we demand it stop. If voters don't hold the President accountable, I guess I'm on a island by myself howling at the damn moon.
Little side note. We have lost our AAA credit rating for the first time since 1941. Why? In part because of our massive debt. I'm sure you know the consequences of that, especially if it drops again as once expected.
We lost our credit rating because Republicans decided to make an issue of raising the debt ceiling limit, something they never had a problem with when the president was a Republican. S&P specifically called out the inability for Republicans to compromise when they downgraded us.
You know this, we've even discussed it here, and yet you still march it out as Obama's fault. You're like a broken record.
It's over, Obama won. Suck it up. And he won despite the best efforts of the Republican establishment to burn him down and raze the country in the process. I, for one, hope they suffer for the rest of time. The party sucks, it's message sucks, it's politicians suck, and it's fringe wing is a bunch of assholes, and if they never win another election for president and lose influence, I think that can only be a good thing for our country.
Our national debt has been growing for years dude. Show me where I said it's Obamas fault. You spit out allegations like crazy yet have not one shred of evidence for them. Why say something that isn't true. You do it over and over and over again. I don't think I've ever seen you this illogical and unreasonable since I've been around this place. Whats your problem dude? No way a one party system would ever work and you know it. Damn sure wouldn't be good for the country. Our system is corrupt as hell as it is. At least we have another party to keep things a tad in check.
I hope your this happy with Obama in 4 years. It would be a good thing if you concerned yourself with our country a little and the shape it's in first, and worry about your liberal agenda 2nd.
What I'm talking about is factual. What you inject in what I say isn't.
Me concern myself with our country? That's why I voted for Obama twice. Because I'm concerned with the country, and everyone in it. The Republicans have showed over the last 4 years, starting with Mitch McConnell's "our goal is for Obama to be a one-term president" and ending with Romney's "47% of the country are takers", that they don't care about the country. Oh sure, they care about not raising taxes, and making the government smaller, and getting rid of regulation. But all of that doesn't make the country better. It makes the rich richer. The rich are already rich, and a lot of people in this country are doing very, very well, and the size of our deficit doesn't seem to make a whit of difference to that. No one is refusing to hire because they're concerned about the federal deficit.
I also am not advocating a one-party government. I just don't think our second party should be Republicans. They're a party of the '50's who aren't in touch with the 90's yet, and it's already 2012. There's no friggin reason we need a party for old rich white people. That demographic is rapidly becoming a massive minority in our country. I think we need a secondary party that has some ideas, has some youth, reaches out to some demographics besides "cranky racist" and/or "likes to bomb stuff". There's definitely room for a two-party system in this country, but I think the Republicans are on there way out, and there's a big space opening up for either a slightly right of center party (which the Republicans are not), or a more left of center party (which the Democrats are not).
I'll take Eisenhower's or even Reagan's Republican Party in a second over these narcissistic party-before-country assholes in charge of it now.
Constant overreach in some areas and obstruction in others have been their script. Let's see if they can flip it a bit. There will be some interesting moves coming up...
"I also am not advocating a one-party government. I just don't think our second party should be Republicans. They're a party of the '50's who aren't in touch with the 90's yet, and it's already 2012. There's no friggin reason we need a party for old rich white people. That demographic is rapidly becoming a massive minority in our country. I think we need a secondary party that has some ideas, has some youth, reaches out to some demographics besides "cranky racist" and/or "likes to bomb stuff". There's definitely room for a two-party system in this country, but I think the Republicans are on there way out, and there's a big space opening up for either a slightly right of center party (which the Republicans are not), or a more left of center party (which the Democrats are not)."
Now that makes sense. I will agree with you here. The pubs are killing themselves, and it shows big time since Bush left office. The thing is, we have to vote for these people to have a chance, or to give them a chance. The mindset that a vote to a third party candidate is waisted has to change. Not sure how that happens though.