Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 160 anonymousDiscussion: Something I doubt you know about Congress.
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 31, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Something I doubt you know about Congress. Received from another player. Not SB related but is worthy of a watch. I normally stay away from political stuff, but. Video on Obama's rise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3aCfR8rmrw |
| Feb. 1, 2012 frampton Men's 55 55 posts | LOL, just wasted nine-plus minutes watching the video. Straight from the fever swamps. Most of the "Congressional evidence" presented was in fact to see if Arnold Schwartzenegger could be made eligible to be president; I know Dana Rohrabacher wasn't trying to get Obama as president! (In any event, the Constitution was in fact never amended as proposed by the various folks cited, so what's the point of the video's focus on them??) The birth-certificate thing has been thoroughly debunked -- Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a natural-born citizen (there is no requirement of the parents' citizenship for a person born in the US). Vote against him this year if you don't like him, but don't think you can get him out of office otherwise; the legal challenges have all been rejected because they have no merit. |
| Feb. 1, 2012 shortstop13 Men's 70 10 posts | Agree this is a waste of time. Just vote him out on the merits, plenty of reasons to do so. |
| Feb. 1, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | shortstop, that is easy to say but what are your alternatives? Romney? A completely immoral Gingrich? Please. Same as 4 years ago. An old McCain and that dingbat running mate he had being a heartbeat from the Oval Office? I don't think so, and clearly neither did most. In many ways this is not a good situation. |
| Feb. 1, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 the real key is Congress. Obama and the GOP candidates will use catch phrases, slogans & make promises that the voters might want to hear. They sound good because their all pretty good salesmen. Did anyone really think Obama's latest jobs bill would pass in the House? If Congress keeps the same make up and demeanor as it currently is there will be gridlock no matter who wins in November. |
| Feb. 1, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Actually, my g-mother was born in HI and her birth cert has a state seal. Was none on the one the admin produced. I didn't vote for him wouldn't anyway this time. But there isn't rally anyone who has the people's interest at heart. Not too many 'presidents' have spent well over 4 million on vacations at our expense. |
| Feb. 1, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Scott, was Hawaii a state when your grandmother was born? |
| Feb. 1, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Gary, I know where you are going on this but, YES on Maui. As for the seal* I saw it years ago before she died. It wasa a territory of the US back then, not a 'state' but still hade a seal. *Should have had seals when Assbama was supposedly born there as well since it became a state in '59. He has a '61 YOB. Perhaps some guys on here that were born there could post as to their BC. I wouldn't thing they would change much going from a territory to a state, except for possibly the wording, ie; territory v state. |
| Feb. 2, 2012 frampton Men's 55 55 posts | Just a little research would let you discover that the State of Hawaii's Department of Health released a *computer generated* copy of Obama's long-form birth certificate, so it would not have a stamped seal. Sheesh. |
| Feb. 2, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Despite his perceived flaws and faults, it remains clear that Obama is far and away the best candidate either party can put forward. My God, who wanst Gingrich? Or Romney? And they appear to be the best the Republicans can come up with. :( |
| Feb. 2, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19, apparently Donald Trump is one who wants Romney. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. It'll be news for a few days and then disappear. |
| Feb. 2, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, I am not sure if it is bad, but pretty sure it is not necessarily good. |
| Feb. 2, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | If the endorsement holds up it might be good in that Trump won't run as a third party candidate which would guarantee an obama victory. But then who knows what "The Don" might have up his sleeve? |
| Feb. 2, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | The height of idiocy is doing the same thing multiple times and expecting different results. As a stanch independent, I will vote to change out this President. I actually support Gary Johnson, because he did a heck of a job for New Mexico. And stick8, do you really think that a man who's tagline is 'You're fired' is really going to change anything? |
| Feb. 2, 2012 donll 68 posts | Taits- do you really believe that Obama was not born in America and somehow became president through a giant conspiracy? Wow. That changes my opinion of you. I've read you posts on here and thought you had a lot of good opinions. But now you sort of lose all credibility. I mean... that's just nuts. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | donll-just playing devil's advocate----What person in the whole world would best be able to 'manufacture' a document if he needed it? The whole political situation-both sides, is nuts. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Webbie to answer your question likely not. In fact in a survey (forgot which one) of voters approximately 65% felt Trump's endorsment wouldn't change anything about how they feel about Romney. Approximately 15% said it would be more favorable and approximately 15% felt it would be less favorable. Honestly, Trumps endorsement of Romney is news for a couple days and by next week it'll be pretty much forgotten. But I wouldn't object to hearing him say "you're fired' to Obama next November!! jmo |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, you might want Obama fired, but that means Romney most likely in his place. Or God forbid Gingrich. This is really what you want? |
| Feb. 3, 2012 steve65 Men's 65 177 posts | what does washington politics have to do with senior softball?? Lightbulb blinks to life--oh yeah if Obama wins another term we will not be able to afford to travel to tournaments---if Romney gets elected he will break down the country and sell off the non profitable parts to China--I suggest we start a movement to have constitutional amendment for two terms in congress and out!!! non of the members of congress know what our lives are like and really don't care---we ship our factories overseas in order for the developing world to have jobs to purchae our products which they now make and replace those decent jobs with service industry jobs most paying minimum wage--the country we are passing on to our children and grand children is a mere shadow of what we were left. Have a nice day everyone!!!! I have to go to my Chinese class now. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 perly 88 posts | Hey guys Gary19 states above: "Despite his perceived flaws and faults, it remains clear that Obama is far and away the best candidate either party can put forward. My God, who want Gingrich? Or Romney? And they appear to be the best the Republicans can come up with" Gary19 has spoken, why even have an election? |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | You have a point, since the result is a foregone conclusion unless some viable alternative appears out of nowhere. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | I don't necessarily disagree with you Gary but I look at it this way. Any of the 4 GOP candidates have both personal and political flaws which would cause many to hold their noses while pulling the lever. It shouldn't be this way but unfortunately for me this election is about who to vote against rather than who to vote for. Based on our national debt, our deficit and economic projections down the road I think push has come to shove. jmho |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | America in decline a favorite point of discussion since I've researched it back to the 50's. First it was Sputnik and we were toast, then it was the Vietnam war and the oil shock of the early 70's, Soviet agression, 9/11, now the great recession. A favorite topic of pundits everywhere. Don't bet against America, my two cents. We do one thing extremely well every four years we get to toss out the most powerful man in the world proving to everyone that no is irreplaceable and guarenteeing a fresh set of eyes. Don't underestimate the young adults of today. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Lecak, do you mean the young adults who incessantly tweat, use Facebook like it is the Gospel, text while they drive, live and work in one city while their families are in another, wouldn't know their children's open house if it was held in their basement, and who think music began with Britney Spears and the NBA with Michael Jordan? And this is not a complete knock, as I have 5 of my own in that generation. By the way, I learned no one is irreplaceable when I realized the Yankees won after Ruth, the Oilers after Gretzky, and the 49ers after Montana. LOL But yes, the demise of the USA has been greatly exaggerated. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Gary19 for your reading enjoyment. If the subject is kids and how they're raised, it seems our culture has exactly one story to tell. Anyone who reads newspapers, magazines or blogs knows how it goes: Parents today either can't or won't set limits for their children. Instead of disciplining them, they hover and coddle and bend over backward to protect their self-esteem. The result is that we're raising a generation of undisciplined narcissists who expect everything to go their way, and it won't be pretty when their sense of entitlement crashes into the unforgiving real world. Read 10 articles or books on this topic and you'll find yourself wondering whether one person wrote all of them, so uniform is the rhetoric. The central premise is that the problem's dimensions are unprecedented: What's happening now contrasts sharply with the days when parents weren't afraid to hold kids to high standards or allow them to experience failure. That's why this generation is so self-centered. Take it from journalist Peter Wyden, the cover of whose book depicts a child lounging on a divan eating grapes while Mom fans him and Dad shades him from the sun: It has become "tougher and tougher to say 'no' [to children] and make it stick," he insists. Or listen to the lament of a parent who blames child development experts for the fact that her kids now seem to believe that "they have priority over everything and everybody." Or consider a pointed polemic in the Atlantic. Sure, the author concedes, kids have always been pleasure-seekers, but longtime teachers report that what we're now witnessing "is different from anything we have ever seen in the young before." Forget about traditional values: Things come so easily to today's entitled children that they fail to develop any self-discipline. Powerful stuff. Except that those three indictments were published in 1962, 1944 and 1911, respectively. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Lecak, I will tell you one major difference between 1911, 1944, 1962, and the 1990s into the 21st century. The amount of time that parents work, and the consequent amount of time they are not there with their children. Perhaps I was just lucky, sheltered, call it what you will, but in all of my childhood I did not have a single friend whose mother worked, or whose father traveled for work or lived in a different city than his family. All things my kids saw with their friends on a daily basis. Everyone of my friends' mothers had the same last name he or she did. They were a family unit with a father who came home in the evening and a mother who was there when they walked in the door from school. Parents did not give the kids cell phones at 8 years old so they could keep track of them because no one was home when kids get home from school. No one gave the kids new cars at 16 so they could drive themselves or their younger siblings around because no parents were there to drive them themselves. No one needed tutors because no one was home to help them with their homework. To me, what this did was not tempt the parents to lavish the kids with material items as some compensation for their absence. Consequently we did not develop this sense of entitlement, or get taught and shown that things were more important than people. And that was in the 1960s and '70s. You rarely see that today. Rarely. I am just very glad that is what all five of my kids did see in their home in the '80s and '90s. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 PJ3P Men's 50 94 posts | Who would have known that the board contrarian would support a Marxist |
| Feb. 3, 2012 steve65 Men's 65 177 posts | never thought I would agree with Gary19 --very astute Gary---yo udid forget to add that we learned not everyone was a winner and we were taught to take responsibility for our actions--- |
| Feb. 3, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | PJ3P, please define "support". Pointing out the lack of viable alternatives is support? Hardly. steve, I could have gone on a lot longer but knew I needed to get off the soapbox. |
| Feb. 3, 2012 armiho211 Men's 70 449 posts | OBAMA keeps pushing to " SPREAD THE WEALTH AND FAIR SHARE ", whether romney or gingrich win the gop nomination, do you think obama will offer to split his billion ? dollar war chest with the opposition once the campaign starts ?? sounds fair to me, spread the wealth. or like they say, LIBERALS ARE ALWAYS GENEROUS WITH " OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY ". ACTUALLY, both parties will make promises they cant keep, will say anything to get re-elected, once in, all is forgotten and the people get NAILED AGAIN. one thing is certain, the entitlements and over-spending must be stopped, we cannot continue this madness. when it gets to 40% of the population supporting the other 60%, time to move to new zealand. |
| Feb. 6, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Unfortunately, they are doing what they are being allowed to do. |
| Feb. 6, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | I respect everyone's view with respect to this subject. My opinion is: Obama is a lying deceitfull person. I will not vote for him under any condition. |
| Feb. 6, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | And the Republican candidates aren't/won't be? Obama is not Bill Clinton, but be careful what you ask for. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Obviously you weren't careful what you asked for almost 4 years ago, so why should anyone else be? The Albuquerque Journal also had an article on the unemployment number on Monday-(yesterday) that pointed out what I talked about Saturday----The fact that if they had not shuffled workers out of the work force and to the discouraged workers category and finagled with the marginal worker category, the actual unemployment would be 11.4%. Yet Obama, who has to know this, is still touting the 8.3% figure as an improvement of vast proportions, and so is NDC (National Democratic Channel), DBS (Democratic Broadcast System), and CDNN (Constant Democratic News Network). If that isn't an out and out lie, what is? Vote out anyone with an (I) next to their name-either party. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Unfortunately our only real alternative four years ago was a Republican candidate who, for whatever reason, wanted us to put that dingbat an old man's heart beat from the Oval Office. That just wasn't feasible. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Bomber #7 Men's 60 62 posts | 4 years ago you had Pelosi just 2 ticks away! I'd take "Gary's dingbat" as a lover, a team mate, or as my Commander-in-Chief LONG before I'd take the highest ranking female Socialist and another embarrassment to the USA like her boss. Hindsight is 20/20. McCain wouldn't have had to have been very effective to have been an improvement over where this clown has taken us. Not a leader at all. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Sad state when we are trying to find the lesser of multiple evils. And perhaps true, but McCain would have had to stay alive. Have you ever noticed how much physically Carter and Clinton aged during their times in office? McCain didn't have that much aging left to give. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Eurskine Men's 50 185 posts | Very Interesting conversations....For my two cents,when it comes to my Lively-hood and my family...."Don't trust Anybody". I am in the process of preparing my taxes now,and it sickens me to know that my tax rate is the same as Romneys and Gibgrich..28%...now let me compare this..about 70,000 a year against 20+ million a year..hummmm,...Obama said he had no problem in being taxed more,why then is it a problem for everyone else.Nobody wants their money,.but for them to pay more since they make more....Diplomacy is something we needed..If nothing else,We went in to snare Bin Laden....we grooved Khadafy for his departure....We went into Somalia and rescued two americans,and we used a lot of Diplomacy in doing so....No help from the party of NO....tHE pRESIDENT IS THE cOMMANDER-IN -Chief, but the Title is just a figurehead for BLAME...Congress is suppose to be the lawmakers...yet they sit back,we suffer,and they say,we will not support you,because we want you to fail,....THEY DON'T PAY SOCIAL SECURITY,but after they leave,they draw the same salary,because they make the law....they are willing to cut social security,because it does not affect them.Congressional members may start out making $140,000,but by the time they join toe good old boy club,and become a certified Lobbyist,it rises to $250,000 plus...guess what, i am still making the same,amd as part of the middle class,i still pay more taxes percentage wide than he does...Not like Romney who makes 20 plus million a year with 6 Bank accounts outside the Continental US...IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, Switzerland is a neutral Country..meaning we don't know how much money he is withholding...whew,..now i am through.!!!.... |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | No question that everyone should play by the rules, the same rules. But why is everyone so quick to criticize and want to penalize those who succeed? So what if a guy, or woman, who makes a gazillion dollars pays the same percentage? They achieved, we did not as much so. For the most part, whose fault is that? Just sounds like sour grapes. Again, we should all have the same rules we have to follow, but after that let the successful succeed. Most of us wouldn't have jobs if not for someone succeeding, building and maintaining a successful company, and employing us. You guys who want to tax the wealthy out of being wealthy just might wind up taxing your employer, and you, out of his company. Again, be careful what you ask for. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | No matter who's taxing the rich or not taxing the rich, the simple fact is that Obama must go. He is worse than terrible. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I don't think it will be, but good luck with that if the nominee is Gingrich. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Eurskine Men's 50 185 posts | Gary,don't get me wrong, NO SOUR GRAPES,in my Vineyard.I wish all the best.Regardless if its Obama..Romney..OR Gingrich...i really don't care..I don't even care how much money they got...I work..take care of my family..and then i play softball....All i was attempting to say was ,the difference of me paying 28%, and the big boys pay 13% is a little off.If you achieved alot thru hard work or theft from others,good...I am happy for you...They are all crooks,looking out for themselves,and every new one that goes to Washington,gets caught up in the same mess..Politics is about money..its a Business....and only the strong survives...I will say this,Look at what you got ,and what you could get...Now, lets go to the POLLS and VOTE.!! |
| Feb. 7, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Eurskine your missing something. Mitt Romney is strictly an investor. He's not an employee of a company like I presume you might be. The reason investors are charged a lower tax rate is because it's an incentive for them to invest. The money they put in is at risk whereas the money you earn in a salary is not at risk. If that rate was raised to what you pay that would discourage investing. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Marv19 Men's 60 498 posts | I have been watching this topic and I really didn't want to post but I have to comment. If the present administration wanted to tax the rich why didn't they do it when they had the chance? Pretty hard to charge $3,000 to $5,000 thousand dollars a plate at those fund raisers if your going after their taxes isn’t it? No their agenda was to bail out banks and shove a health care system down our throats. I just had surgery and my co-pay nearly doubled from two years ago. Doubled!!! I was given a prescription for a tiny vile of eye drops and my portion was $90. I had to take two others at $40 and $86. That was my share of Medicare and I have a stop gap policy. That was just one eye. I have to do it all over again next week. This I’m told is the result of the new health care system that is slowly taking hold. Can’t do it all at once cus we have an election soon.. right? If we used diplomacy in Somalia why are 9 Somalian kidnappers rotting in the ground? If a military person sets up a gun and aims it at a target and Mr. O pulls the trigger then how does that warrant victory lap speeches? The military and CIA didn't get nearly enough credit in my opinion. If I earn money and I pay taxes on it at say 30% then I invest the un-taxed portion of that money and draw out some of the profit as living expense. And now I pay 15% on that money that is mine in the first place why is it I'm being sinful? Isn’t that a 45% tax? So now we persecute people that are successful in this country?... seriously. If the fund I invest in puts the money I send in along with countless other investors in a foreign bank why am I being criticized? I don’t own the fund, I invest in it. BTW Its the law. Don't like it change it! The City of Los Angeles is putting $680,000 of “job creating” stimulus money into a yacht they own for new engines and I cant get my home refinanced that is worthless right now. How many jobs were created on this project? Is that not a sin as well. $500,000,000 (count the zeros) into a company that goes bankrupt right away. Sin or not sin? But we did get our photo op with Mr. Bumbles and Mr. O in hard hats didn't we? General Motors... shall we say no more after the private investors got screwed on that deal and the unions got another sweet deal. Canadian pipeline... how many jobs did we kill there? How about a border agent killed with our own guns and and no one knows anything and all are pointing fingers at each other. Worse is the border agent’s family cant sue bc the government is immune from prosecution in this incident. And our AG wont own up to it bc he’s to busy doing his soft shoe routine in front of congress. Do these people think we are really that stupid? Honestly. I'm an independent thinker but there's as much transparency in this administration as my bad cataract left eye. Now he’s blaming the founding fathers for creating laws that make it hard for him to do what he wants to do. (see interview with Matt Lauer) Its called the Constitution... tough! Much to your dismay Mr. O we didn't crown you we elected you! Sorry but my mantra this year is A.B.O. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | It's pointless to argue with Gary about the problems of each point of Obama's agenda to turn the USA into a country like France or to defend the candidates that might opose him. Our duty is to vote for which ever candidate oposes him and get him out of the presidency.The examples given by Marv19, are merely a few results of the Obama injustices. There are millions more. The next time Obama goes on a trip perhaps Gary can pay the expenses of the guy he takes along to play basketball with him. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | You want to argue, have a valid argument. "Our duty is to vote for which ever candidate oposes him and get him out of the presidency" is not one. Just isn't well thought out, heck doesn't really have much thought at all. While you are at it, if you care to make sense, tell me a President who did not do things that large numbers of people found wrong/improper/offensive. You want to talk about trips, check the number of days the second Bush spent in Texas during his presidency. |
| Feb. 7, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Stick8-thanks for putting in the part about Romney being an investor-and nobody mentions the 3 MILLION he GAVE to charity or church. Last I saw wasn't that even better than giving it to the Government, because the government would waste most of it. Add that to the taxes he paid and his rate of 'contribution to society' is much higher than the normal man, and that doesn't even include the fact that invested money is 'after-tax' money, meaning he already paid taxes on it at the 'normal' income tax rate. And the media is smart enough to know it, they just think we aren't smart enough to figure it out and they can use it to cut him down. And they are right. So many have jumped in to believe without thinking it through. Gary19, I don't care for Gingrinch either. I happen to like Gary Johnson-he did a heck of a job for 2 terms as governor of NM, but he is off the beaten path. However-to me-the beaten path sure isn't working for us. But-the overall killer for me on Obama was the Keystone Pipeline. We are not going to import or use any less oil by having the project blocked. Whether we want to believe it or not, oil is not going away anytime soon. We can wish all we want to but there is not a viable alternative yet-and if you think the American people will put up with a power shortage of any kind, think again. We will continue to import oil at an incredible pace, and if you don't think transporting oil across oceans is potentially more harmful to the environment that sending it through a pipeline, then you haven't studied it at all. It would have put thousands back to work at a time we desperately need it. I would give us a much needed small step toward energy independence, and with Iran flexing their muscles and sabre rattling at a time where we are still involved in many conflicts globally AND cutting our military by 100,000 soldiers and $500 Billion, I believe it was (and IS) of utmost importance to us to go forward with the project. It was strictly a political move aimed at solidifying the environmental base for his re-election and I hope it ended his chances to be re-elected. But, too many have been swayed by a sympathetic media that continually attacks Republicans and gives Obama a pass. Sadly, I am only one vote.......but that vote will go against incumbents in all races. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Mark, each can vote based on whatever criteria they want. But to simply vote out all incumbants, while appealing, is foolhardy. To not place logical votes, on whatever form of actual logic one chooses to apply, hurts a democracy and a society. Sadly, sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. And be careful of what you ask for. Okay, I am done with corny cliches. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 PJ3P Men's 50 94 posts | Uh, the trips to Crawford were not vacations. It was known as the Southern White House and was often used to entertain foreign leaders. They were working trips not vaca's. But then trying to reason with an Obama voter is definitely the definition of insanity. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | "working trips"? Were you born gullible, or evolved? Ever hear of guys from the North who took "working trips" to Florida, entertain a client/customer for purposes of writing off the trip, and then did what most Northern people would do in Florida? "Obama voter"? Well, yea sort of, until I am given some viable alternative. An old guy and a dingbat weren't it. Wish there was, but I keep waiting.............. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Again, you obviously were not careful four years ago-and you know it by referring to Obama as 'the devil you know'. So you, as the purported intelligent person nobody here should debate, are choosing to do the same thing you did four years ago and are expecting different results. Just as 'foolhardy' as voting out ALL incumbents. Or is it? The auto industry 'resurgence'?? Gee, nobody has bought cars for 3 years and cars age too quickly-people drive a lot. It had to come back. If it wasn't for the unbelievable government spending, I doubt our GDP would have gone up. (One of the 4 components of the GDP--when consumer spending goes down, you compensate with government spending to balance it). However, Obama has ignored the other half of the equation-you cannot create too large a deficit or debt. And, if you have half the brain you say you do, you know we cannot continue to spend this way. Yet, you choose to vote for a man who has said he will continue to do the same things if he gets re-elected. Really??? If we do not break the 'seniority gridlock' in Congress and get the idiots that have been there way too long out of there, nothing will ever get done either, no matter who the President is. And those people have way too much money in their war chests and will stop at nothing to get re-elected. They feel no true vulnerability in elections. We need to change that. That is more 'logical' that continuing status quo. Those of us that know Gary Johnson would, to a man, vote for him over any other candidate. A throwaway vote??? That's what either party will tell you (their way of protecting their hallowed two party system), but I am beginning to believe a vote for status quo is a throwaway vote. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I just think, despite how frustrating it can be, you have to try and make informed decisions on who to vote for and not just do it in such broad generalizations as "vote all incumbants out". Again, I can see how someone could feel this way, but to just assume all challengers are "better" than all incumbants is just not logically sound. And yes, the devil I know............. Not happy it has come to this, but the days of the great American statesmen are long gone. Abe Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt are not walking through the door anytime soon. Heck, neither is Bill Clinton. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | I never said or assumed all challengers are better than incumbents. You are reading into things I said. I believe we need a wholesale change of attitude in Washington and the only way is to get rid of the incumbents. I know I am hoping for too much, but it has to start somewhere. Do you have a better way? |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | So, if I am following the bread crumb trail correctly, you are saying we need to get rid of the incumbants even though the challengers are not necessarily better. I am sure they could be, or might not, but you are willing to take that chance as an alternative to what we have now. And no, no better way, other than to try and evaluate the candidates and make the most informed decision we can knowing there is no guarantee that will produce any improvement. Basically it is just a broke-ass system. =( |
| Feb. 8, 2012 5ToolsinOhio Men's 50 160 posts | Here is a bread crumb trail for years that i followed...there all crooks! |
| Feb. 8, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Webbie that's an interesting point about government wasting money. I have quite a few clients who's yearly income would fall into the range that Obama feels tax rates must be increased. To a person they all say they wouldn't necessarily mind paying a higher rate but they feel that money would be completely wasted. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Bill Clinton mentioned in the same sentence as Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Rosevelt. Now you showed your true self Gary. You're out of your mind. No wonder you prefer that bum in the White House. You deserve him. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | As do you, Ceres. They were in different sentences. Are you blaming the Democrats for your lack of knowledge of the language? So you would have preferred McCain, his eventual death from the stress of the job, and then Palin in the Oval Office? |
| Feb. 8, 2012 ChiPrimeMarty Men's 60 104 posts | When I was in my early 20's my father owned a neighborhood tavern frequented mostly by guys our age now. When I tended bar my dad knew my interaction and conversation with our customers could be a positive for the business, but he cautioned me to never ever get into debates about religion or politics. It was good advice, not only in that business environment but also within a group like a softball team. I'm pretty sure some of my teammates hold very different political views, and given the level of political discourse so evident today I've made an effort to avoid the divisiveness that can easily spoil team chemistry and even friendships. I'm all for intelligent fact-based civil debate on important issues. Unfortunately there is little of that on any level, including nationally televised debates between candidates who might be the next POTUS. |
| Feb. 8, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Chi-look who is moderating those debates-left leaning commentators that just want to make them look bad. It's no wonder you see bad GOP debates most of the time. Gary-I think you are close, but my feeling is unless the incumbents stop feeling secure and start doing our business instead of fattening their pocketbooks, nothing will change. If we vote incumbents out-en masse- for a couple elections, maybe they will get the idea. It can't get much worse than it is. However, too many people believe THEIR Congressman is not the problem and they keep returning them. I believe it is almost, if not all of them. Stick8-do you know the best estimate I have found on what the Obama tax would generate as far as income is? 11 Billion. With a deficit in the Trillions. Yet he would start class warfare over that. There has to be another agenda---aha-there is----RE ELECTION!!!!! Inequality-Obama's big issue. Read 'The Have's and the Have Nots' by Catherine Rampell-printed in the NY TIMES 1/31/2011. Interesting graph comparing the income disparity in the US vs several countries in the world. Our poorest ventile (there are 20 income ventiles) is so high, that we have much less income disparity than most of the world. But nobody ever checks the facts. |
| Feb. 9, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | My error,Gary, I appologise to you and all the Democrats that I have blamed for my lack of knowledge of the language. Mentioning Clinton in the same breath as Rosevelt and Lincoln is worse than lack of knowledge. Asking me if I prefered McCain, McCain's death, then a Palin succession, events that are not going to happen is pure ignorance. McCain lost the election and still lives. The only time anyone hears about Palin is when one of you hot house liberals jumps her case and the coward makes sure she's not around because she'd kick his butt. No more of your hypothetical nonsense. Obama is the worse thing that happened to the USA in my lifetime. |
| Feb. 9, 2012 Capt Kirk 541 posts | Let's see, Newt(NO), Willard (NO), Rick S (NO), or Ron (NO), I am adding the President to my senior softball team. |
| Feb. 9, 2012 Capt Kirk 541 posts | Point well taken: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/millionaire-investor-calls-higher-taxes-rich-145808200.html |
| Feb. 9, 2012 MichaelH386 Men's 65 31 posts | I believe that the job of the President,Congress and the House is to do what is best for the country It seems that the Republicans (could have been the Democrats if a Republican had won)had said our main job is to do everything possible to make sure Obama don't have a second term.This was done even before he was sworn in,it doesn't sound like they were interested in the country only there party!!! |
| Feb. 9, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Yes he still lives, not having been in office. Look at how much Carter and Clinton physically aged during their terms, and see what might/would/could have happened to McCain from that same stress. Now picture Palin in his office. Scary, very scary. She'd kick butt? Now that's funny. Nice job she did of quitting on the state of Alaska. Nice job she did raising her daughter. Nice job she did cheating on her husband. Nice job she did being able to see Russia. You really wanted/want her if office? Oh my........... Never defended Obama, at all, just weighed him against the sad state of the alternatives. In 2008, and now. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | The candy man* can.... *not one person but the many within the system. http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?feature=player_embedded&v=5u03KAcEbEo#%21 |
| Feb. 10, 2012 PJ3P Men's 50 94 posts | I found a picture of the board troll....and we all know who I mean :-) http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=head+up+butt&view=detail&id=29A08E2E52FF6409CA14D5B102237E367EDF034C&first=0&qpvt=head+up+butt&FORM=IDFRIR |
| Feb. 10, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 not defending Sarah Palin here but I don't believe SP ever was quoted a saying she could see Russia from her front porch. That was Tina Fey doing an imitation of her on Saturday Night Live. SP did say something to the effect that from the western tip of Alaska you can see the tip of Russia across the water. As I understand it on a crystal clear, sunny day you can. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Wow, Gary, tell us what you really think of Sarah Palin. Don't be afraid of her. Remember, she's not running and she's not in the news. I won't tell her what you wrote so she won't come looking for you. Grab your teddy bear, crawl under the covers and feel safe. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Strange post Ceres, very strange. And whether she is currently not running or is not in the news has no bearing on her having been the "best" the GOP could put on a national ticket less than 4 years ago. Very sad. stick, if so I stand corrected. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I guess she was technically second-best. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Sarah P., ole smiley face, who has quit both high ranking jobs she has held....good choice. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Scott, the sad part is the GOP must not have believed they had anyone better. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Gary My feeling on politics is that unless you vote for a person you honestly learn about and is basically what you want doing the job (according to what you learn in all that), it's a crap shoot. I feel that is what's wrong with the system. I don't vote party. I vote person. Per you post, too bad they do not look elsewhere even it outside the box (gop). ------ For the business owners & those working for someone & reading all this poly sci 'crap',...How many of your employees or those employed, gave themselves pay increases? I doubt any or very few. They did in congress. Twice recently. Countless if you include perks of the last 60 years. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | But the truth is, pretty close to all those employees would have given themselves an increase if they could. It might be a flaw in the system that Congress can do that, but just about anyone outside of Congress would if they had the authority to. So let's not knock them too badly for that, we all probably would if we could. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary, like any other legislation Congress voted to give themselves a raise and the POTUS signed off on it. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Understood stick, I was just trying to tell taits that most of us, heck him for all I know, would do the same thing if we could. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Of course everybody would like to Gary. It may not be financially feasible for some but in the case of Congress being financially feasible that's unheard of these days. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Point is that they are "supposed" to be looking out for our interest, the taxpayers. The are only self serving. Voters just can't fire them. and waiting to vote against them & out of office usually is a money vs zero bucks fight like what is going on now. Bosses can basically pink ship some one where workers need to count on yearly raised etc. But I do thing some would like the ability to get a raise when wanted. Are either worth the time actually spent? Who knows. Average congressman from what I have read\watched on videos and all, actually work only about one-two months on the hill. I have visited out reps locally and since a couple are in plain view, I saw not much going on. One was reclining in a chair at his desk mind you but arms behind his head. Hope he wasn't asleep. Another time on the phone, probably his girlfriend. lol I doubt there would be much RED INK etc etc, if they actually did what they were sworn to do rather than what they do. Have you researched what they are getting? You might be shocked, maybe not. ---- Well system is broke but its the on;y one we have. Next up we'll be in Iran or Syria.... maybe both. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Strange post...I'll try to clarify it for you, Gary. As you said Sarah Palin ran for VP 4 years ago. She and McCain lost to Witless Joe and BO.She is not running now. She is not even in the news. So why are you having a coniption over Sarah Palin? The GOP had Herbert Hover, Wendell Wilke,Thomas Dewey, and Barry Goldwater on the ticket some years ago. They were the best that the GOP had to offer and they lost. Why don't you badmouth them also. It seems that you have a deep hatred and possible fear of Sarah Palin. |
| Feb. 10, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Which one of them, as bad as they might have been, would you take Palin over? |
| Feb. 10, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | The "Political Tree" President Democrats..Republicans State...Politicians American...People When top level people look down, they see only shitheads; When the bottom level people look up, they see only assholes. You will Never see another Flow Chart that describes politics so clearly. |
| Feb. 11, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | I still don't see any other way to get the system to change other than voting out every incumbent for two or three or four election cycles to effect a change in their attitudes. Question for all---Would you run for a major office if you knew your opponent was going to drag you through the dirt (unless you are Obama), drag your family into the muck (unless you are Obama), tell outrageous lies about you (unless you are Obama), watch every single breath you take, delve up every mistake you made growing up (unless.......you get the idea), take quotes out of context to make you look bad, have women or men coming out of the woodwork to say they had sex with you because they think they can make a buck selling the story, ......... . etc, etc. I wouldn't, and I think only a true idiot would. And that explains why we have only self serving idiots in office. |
| Feb. 11, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Gary19-you epitomize the biggest problem we have with Congress-especially when you talked about their giving themselves raises. You give up and even make excuses for them. Man, they love people like you and laugh at you because you are so gullible. You don't call them on the carpet, just like you will not truly call Obama onto the carpet. It's easy to udck and run and you don't have the stomach to challenge them. You admitted several times that you think Obama is the best of a bad lot. How sad you accept that instead of trying to do something. Again, the height of idiocy is to make the same mistake over and over and expect different results. Looks to me like you are going to do that instead of fighting back to at least try to fix what you called a 'broke-ass system'. |
| Feb. 11, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Webbie25: You go into detail (ad nauseum) as to why 'only an idiot would run for public office today'. If you're correct, it surely doesn't provide us with much in the way of alternatives. Given a negative mindset like yours perhaps we should just vote for a dead man like the good people of MO did in the 90s. In lieu of John Ashcroft they elected a man that had died the previous month. I guess that, like you, they wanted to 'out the incumbent' at any cost. I've been a registered Republican since college but have seen poor candidates, bad public officials from both parties. As a result, I prefer to vote for the candidate and if this means 'the lesser of the evils', so be it. This is my right and it is irrelevant to me how others feel about my choices. A lot of people have died over 'the right to vote'... here and abroad. BW |
| Feb. 11, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Gee Mark, where do I begin? 1) Despite your noble, idealistic intentions some of us are pragmatic enough to realize/know/accept you aren't going to be able to change squat. 2) No "excuses" were made at all, just enough realism to understand that MANY would do the same thing if given the same opportunity. Just the way it is. 3) You can call it gullible, but I prefer to deal with the real and "voting out every incumbent for two or three or four election cycles" just ain't happenin'. It just isn't, so spout all you want, what you say is so radical/unrealistic/foolish to even discuss it isn't worth contemplating. 4) Why you, and others on here, interpret my realistic view of the sad state of what the GOP has to put up against Obama as approval (tacit or otherwise) of Obama is just not very perceptive. 5) To characterize my observations of what is happening as not having "stomach" is just rhetoric. Anyone can spout the silly stuff you are, but it has NO chance and is NOT based in anything realistic and if that is what you consider having stomach/guts/conviction/balls good luck with that one. 6) "How sad you accept that instead of trying to do something" What are you really doing? Spewing on an old man softball board? That is your version of "doing something"? Ummmmmm, it really isn't. It is just some macho talk. Tell us what you have really done, and and using your keyboard on here does NOT count. 7) Who is making the same mistake over and over? Challengers win offices all the time. You foolishly act like incumbants have been winning ALL the races for hundreds of years. That is clearly not true, so what you "propose" as some solution has been done. So where is your new and, try this on for size, realistic approach? |
| Feb. 11, 2012 Pricer Men's 50 621 posts | Hey, what about them Dodgers? |
| Feb. 11, 2012 Pricer Men's 50 621 posts | Hey, what about them Dodgers? |
| Feb. 11, 2012 5ToolsinOhio Men's 50 160 posts | Dodgers: What better way to spend Valentine's Day than at Dodger Stadium? Book a tour to visit with your sweetheart. |
| Feb. 12, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | You're absolutely right, wood. I am very frustrated and you say I don't have an answer. I don't, but I wanted to try to do SOMETHING in my life. It's all wrong. But, I will shut up. I asked once earlier in the thread and will ask again. Has anyone got a better idea to fix our situation? Or am I wrong and everything is wonderful? I am all ears. |
| Feb. 12, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | I am not sure if this a national solution or not. I stopped buying the solid party line and began making my own choices. At the least, this has helped me feel better about my role. The spin masters can make red seem blue and vv.I try to distance myself from their comments. This posture works in other walks of life as well. If you listen/read deeply enough you 'hear/see' the 'I' in their comments. There are times when I fail at this and find myself deeper in a discussion than I like. BW |
| Feb. 12, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Read very closely, Gary. Over the past few days I have been trying to get across to you that Sarah Palin is not running. I won't be voting for her. Again:SARAH IS NOT RUNNING..UNDERSTAND. |
| Feb. 12, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | All weekend and that is the best you've got? Sad. The GOP has only marginally improved its lot of candidates this time around. The Democrats have what they have, whatever you think of them, and the Republicans have less to challenge them. Not a rosy picture, but it is what it is. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | wood-I made the mistake of taking 2 economics courses this last year and now I know for sure what they are doing. That's what really ticked me off at both parties. It's all smoke and mirrors. Honest figures on anything? Doubtful. Congress out of control-undoubtably true-there should be no debate on that. Marthat Stewart goes to jail for something ONLY Congress can do legally? Are you serious. We won't change this by a few incumbents being voted out at a time. Congress is too insulated from us. I still haven't heard anyone come out with an idea to fix our 'broke-ass' system. Oh, well. Wood-didn't you play with GSF or those guys in Phoenix? Everyone talks very highly of you. I am going to play with them this year. It would be my pleasure if you came out and said hi. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Gary, it took me a long time to come up with something simple enough that you would understand. I finally was successful. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Webbie: Yes, I was with GSF for 9 years, of which 4 years were with the AZ guys. They 'speak highly of me' only because I've kept meticulous records of where all the stats are buried. They are a great group... I miss them... like the fat kid misses cake. :-) |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Ceres, sounds like you might need the same offer I have made to others who have so foolishly tread where you are going. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Webbie unfortunately the administration has done zero in addressing the real fiscal concern, entitlements. The actuarys of both medicare and social security are on record as saying at the current rate both will be dissolved within 20-25 years. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, I am sure they are saying that but people have been predicting the end of social security for quite some time now. I don't think it will go away anytime soon. The political ramifications to those in office if that were to happen, mainly due to the number of seniors with little else to do but wreak havoc on their elected officials careers, is discouragement enough to them. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 boston Men's 60 355 posts | Any working middle class white male that would vote Democrat is a complete idiot. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | a) I guess I should be glad we are not middle class b) I could say the same about anyone who votes strictly along party lines without regard for the individual candidates. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Gary, I don't know what you mean by my foolish treading. On the other hand, it is very clear we have different opinions which I agree we each should honor. You think Obama is prefered over any of the GOP candidates. I prefer any GOP candidate over Obama. There is no sense to try to convince each other differently. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I do think that, though admittedly by default. Not on his merits, but as I have said before more the lesser of a collection of evils. We can disagree to disagree. |
| Feb. 13, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Oops. How about agree to disagree. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Status quo, yup that's going to change our 'broke-ass system', right Gary? You like the direction we are going, right? That's what you are saying by voting for Obama and he will take it as a mandate. That's what you are saying to incumbents that get voted back in--'I like what you are doing-please keep doing it! 8-10 percent approval rate for Congress? Time for a change?? There's only one way-the voting booth. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Mark, why make stuff up? When did I say that? Seriously, when? Point that out for us, would you? What I did say is the devil you know can be better than the one you don't, and that there is NO viable alternative. I will take my life today, well other than my son deploying next month, over anything the guys the GOP is offering will provide. Again, you act like challengers have never won before. Yet you are still complaining so apparently that was not the solution either. And no, I don't believe in just blindly voting any buffoon in for the sake of change. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | So, if I am following the bread crumb trail correctly, you are saying we need to get rid of the incumbants even though the challengers are not necessarily better. I am sure they could be, or might not, but you are willing to take that chance as an alternative to what we have now. And no, no better way, other than to try and evaluate the candidates and make the most informed decision we can knowing there is no guarantee that will produce any improvement. Basically it is just a broke-ass system. =( Gary-that was your your post on Feb 8. Consider it pointed out. A vote for Obama says you like what's going on-he would take it as his mandate. That won't change anything. Challengers win a few elections but have no power against the incumbents that have been there too long. Do you really think ANY incumbent would take being elected as being the best of a poor choice?? Seriously!!! Most are buffoons already. Haven't you figured that out?? Almost to a man here everyone agrees we have a major problem. Why keep reelecting all the people responsible for the problem?? Wood-I'm shutting up-----again. ;-) |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I must be missing it. Where did I say I "like the direction we are going"? No, a vote for Obama simply says he is the "best" of a bad lot. Or at least a known v. the unknown and not very promising bunch the GOP is putting before us. And the incumbants can take my vote however they like, how they take it is not really relevant. It won't affect what they will or won't do in office. They will do as they please regardless. Please don't think Obama is responsible for any particular problem. Bush was atrocious, Carter before him, it goes on and on. While Obama might not have helped, this was an issue long before him and it appears it will be one long after. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Bomber #7 Men's 60 62 posts | I do not put Nobama in the best of very many categories, perhaps lies and socialistic push maybe. Best of a bad lot!!! Even if he's in favor of turning us into a Europe???? I don't see any other candidates expressing those disasterous views. I'd take any other person running(and that would include Gary's favorite squeeze, the former Alaska Gov., Sarah Palin, she won't lead us down the path of socialism at least), Nobama is the bottom of the barrel. He's not a leader and is taking us down the drain. If you are in favor or socialism or are on the govt handout program, or maybe one of the 49% that don't pay any taxes at all, your vote will help continue the flush of Armerica as the it slides down the drain under Nobama. He has no clue!!!! He has no positive economic program for the USA. He's been an embarrassment for our nation. Wasted spending. No budget cuts where needed. Just continues with socialist issues. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 tg69 393 posts | Heres my take on this.We need to quit worrying about Democrats and Republicans and all be AMERICANS and work TOGETHER to get out of this MESS.Not work against each other. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | "And no, I don't believe in just blindly voting any buffoon in for the sake of change." Seems to me anyone who voted for Obama was voting for a Buffoon who promised and used "Change" as his platform. What was his vast experience when he ran in 08? Far less then "most" GOP candidates today. We made a change on Obamas promises, they havent worked out. Now we need to let someone else try. Plain and simple. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I am not sure if Obama was voted in on his promises, since they all make/break them, but on the lack of viable opponents. Call me crazy, but I still think things can get worse and see no reason to believe Romney or Gingrich will be any better. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | You said in another post something about considering Santorum. Well, still think that or does that change now that he moves into the picture? |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | By voting for Obama as the 'best of a bad lot' you are voting to go in the same direction, so you must like it enough not to change your vote, Gary. Whether you do like it or not, that will be the interpretation of a vote for him. A mandate. Votes for someone are ALWAYS support for them, never considered by the candidate to be a vote against the other guy. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I guess I might consider him, though actually for some reason Paul strikes me as the best of that bunch. Just a gut feel. Yes, he is the best of a bad lot. No I don't think the direction is very good, but at least I know what that direction is. I just don't see anything in Gingrich or Romney to believe theirs would be any better. I listen to them in the debates, and while I understand none of them can be taken at face value also none of them strike me as very genuine people, or even decent candidates who might really have something better to offer. Mark, the same can be said for a GOP vote. That would give them a mandate as well. The devil you know.............. |
| Feb. 14, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | The devil you know......continues to exist in both forms unless WE change it. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | True enough, but they have to come up with a viable alternative. Not "I'll vote for the other guy just because". |
| Feb. 15, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Nothing will be a viable alternative to a die-hard liberal like yourself--you just won't admit it.........and nothing changes-again.... |
| Feb. 15, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | "die-hard liberal"?????? Too funny. Always had the habit of jumping to wrong conclusions? So that is what I am because I can easily recognize that the GOP has not, and is still not, providing a viable altenative to Obama? Calling him the lesser of evils makes me a die-hard? Knowing that the devil you know.............. makes me a staunch liberal? Ummmmmmmm, not really. Please tell me which Republican candidate from either 2008 or now, in a perfect world, you would want in the Oval Office. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | None of them could have or can do much worse. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | To answer your question Gary19 I would take any of the 4 GOP candidates, even Ron Paul. But there is more to this than just a candidate. All candidates and Obama will say and claim all these things their supporters want to hear. What people tend to overlook is while the POTUS can encourage legislation, both houses of Congress determine and come up what legislation is drawn up, not the POTUS. Just as an example if Congress had the same make up back in '08-'10 as it does today there is no way Obamacare, Dodd-Frank and the stimulus package would have passed. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Things could be a lot worse. This is NOT the 1930s revisited. I am in better shape financially today than I have ever been, though I fully realize not everyone can say that. But how many were saying that in the '30s. So yea, it could be worse. Could they be better? Of course. What can't be, when you really think about it. stick, I just couldn't disagree with your first statement more. I am not a big fan of Obama despite Webbie continually trying to claim otherwise, nor am I a big fan of the military action he has us involved in in Afghanistan that my son will be joining next month, but to see Gingrich in the office for example is just incomprehensible to me. Heck, how many First Ladies will he go through while he is there? |
| Feb. 15, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Many of you have stated that 'things couldn't be worse' but few of you have given any specific details. So I presume that you mean that the economy couldn't be any worse. Ignoring party affiliations for a minute, take a little stroll down memory lane and look at the 20 year history of the DJIA, S&P 500 and/or Nasdaq 100 readings. Pay particular attention to early 1993, 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2009. Those years coincide with the beginning of new terms for the White House (i.e. innaugerations). You can compare the market activity (investor confidence) from one administration to another. Is the stock market's activity totally indicative of economic health? No. But investor confidence is a huge issue whether you're a liberal, moderate or conservative. Stick: You mentioned a few days ago that this administration has done little/nothing to bolster Soc Sec and/or Medicare. Which administration has? It is a govt approved Ponzi Scheme, which implies that future payments to retirees are based upon future revenues received from workers. The lower the ratio of workers to retirees the bigger the problem becomes. Boston: What does being a middle class, white male imply (as opposed to a middle class woman or anything other than a white male)? BW |
| Feb. 15, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 I'm not certain Newt Gingrich is the guy the GOP can rally around. Remember his own party coerced him to resign when he was speaker. My question with Newt is what the work consisted of or the "consulting" that he did for Freddie Mac. I suspect Freddie Mac was using Newt to curry favor with certain GOP'ers that Newt was still close to. That's just one example. If one too the time to look long nad hard enough you could find issues on all the candidates that might would cause many to wonder. There are two guys that aren't running that I personally would much prefer to what the GOP has now. And the way the primaries are going it's possible the GOP could have a brokered convention. Then it's fair game for anyone to jump in. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | BW you are exactly correct in that no administration has addressed the entitlements. Actuaries for both medicare and ss are on record as stating at the rate things are going they cannot be sustained. Something has to be done. I don't know if this is accurate but I've read estimates at $100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities over the next 10 years in entitlements. Who's paying for all this? |
| Feb. 15, 2012 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Here you go Woody, dont thank me, thank our Dr friend, K.Kreme........ There's an old sea story about a ship's Captain who inspected his sailors, and afterward told the first mate that his men smelled bad.. The Captain suggested perhaps it would help if the sailors would change underwear occasionally. The first mate responded, "Aye, aye sir, I'll see to it immediately!" The first mate went straight to the sailors berth deck and announced, "The Captain thinks you guys smell bad and wants you to change your underwear." He continued, "Pittman, you change with Jones, McCarthy, you change with Witkowski, and Brown, you change with Schultz." THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Someone may come along and promise "Change", but don't count on things smelling any better. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Stick: I was/am ignorant to the specific projected dollar 'shortfalls'; however, I do know that the projected worker/retiree ratio is supposed to be 1:1 in 20 years. So my advice is to find yourself a worker that earns something 'equal to or greater than' the max SS wage base and have him/her pay you directly. :-) I recall reading about this issue in 1975. The changes that have been made recently (moving the NRA back to 66 or 70) are merely an effort to retard the rate at which the ratio decreases. The reality of this is that Congress has its own retirement system that is much more lucrative than SS. So the elected officials don't REALLY consider SS issues to be that important. If they were dependent upon SS, changes would have already been made. E4/E6: Nice story. Does this mean that you're willing to wear Newt's skivvies for a while? :-) BW |
| Feb. 15, 2012 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | I'm only the messenger Bob, only the messenger. =) Ask Doc this weekend if he's wearing those PANTIES? Then ask whose they are?? hmmmmmmm |
| Feb. 15, 2012 dawgpound69 1 posts | WOW! what a bunch of President Obama hatters on this board. But I understand it, this hate is coming from ignorance. I think some of you forget that Mr. Obama was elected to be president, not magician, because it would take a magician to undo the mess that George Bush left. I wished that Mr. Obama was a magician and he could snap his fingers and make all these anti-Americans (GOP) disappear. |
| Feb. 15, 2012 Wayne 37 Men's 65 773 posts | There are some very mislead, misinformed posters on here. I've always followed politics very close, and I'm aghast at what some people think to be the truth. I encourage these people to read or listen to a reliable source before they go around sounding like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. BTW-The Social Security program is alive and very solvent. |
| Feb. 16, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Dawgpound and Wayne-Bush didn't cause this mess by himself any more than Clinton, Obama, or any one person of either party. It was both parties working in lockstep in Congress to try to look good to their constituents to get re-elected. The one big piece of legislation that opened the door to the housing bubble and the following collapse was a piece of legislation passed by a Republican led congress and signed by Clinton with huge support on both sides. There was so much more on BOTH SIDES it makes me sick and I feel strongly we need to make Congress pay by voting them out until they listen to us and do OUR Work. I need to just take my anger out and write a book about it and then burn it because we will never get together as a population to fix it. Too much hate media on both sides. Too many people believe EVERYTHING they hear without really investigating. The only consensus is we are in BIG trouble. |
| Feb. 16, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Dawgpound69 I don't feel any of the posters you reference hate President Obama. Disagreeing and dissenting against the policies and ideas our President, his administration and those who support him have implemented and want to implement does not amount to hate. In fact during the Bush years I heard many a democrat/liberal say that "dissent against a sitting POTUS is the purest form of patriotism". If that's true then shouldn't also be true regarding those who dissent against President Obama? I firmly believe that in the final analysis we all want to see the same outcomes in solving the political and social issues that we face today. The differences simply lie in how to best go about achieving those outcomes. I must say however that when I read this from your keyboard: "I wished that Mr. Obama was a magician and he could snap his fingers and make all these anti-Americans (GOP) disappear." I find that to be disturbing. Speaking for myself I happen to firmly beleive in the core principles that the republican party stands for. For someone to write that he wishes President Obama could snap his finger and make someone like me disappear can be interpreted as hateful. And I beleive even President Obama would see it that way also. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Good post, stick8. I referred to 'hate media' above and getting people to feel like dawgpound does is their ONLY goal(along with making tons of money to say things like they do) on both sides. Both sides have economic theories that they can prove have worked at one time or another. However, politics can 'muck it up' and both sides HAVE 'mucked it up'. If you are at the point that you feel the opposing party HATES AMERICA, you need to step back and re-examine your situation. Both viewpoints have merit, it is the implementation that is the problem. I still believe, the more I think and talk about it, that we need a wholesale change out of Congress. Get the old fat cats and status quo out. While that may be extreme, nobody here or anywhere else has come up with a better idea. I wonder where we would really end up if the Republicans got both the Senate and the House and Obama got re-elected or Democrats got both and a Republican got elected President. Would that be better than one party having it all? |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | "For someone to write that he wishes President Obama could snap his finger and make someone like me disappear can be interpreted as hateful" Or it could be interpreted as what it might very well have been, a metaphor. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Probably so Gary but there are better ways to word things. Webbie to answer your question probably yes because each branch will watch over the other and not let them get out of control. Checks and balances sort of thing. It's a very real possibility that Obama could be re-elected and the GOP keeps the House and gains the Senate. You'll see even more gridlock if that happens. Speaking of Obama being re-elected, he almost never misses an opportunity to blame Bush and the republicans for the mess he inherited upon taking office. Should he get re-elected does this mean that he will blame himself for the mess he inherited from himself? |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, let's be objective here. The other side of that coin is the GOP never fails to blame Obama for the mess we are in. That is the nature of this beast. One side is never more guilty of pointing fingers than the other. Just how it is. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Webbie the reason your not getting better ideas is because there literally aren't any. It is like our jury system it has flaws all over the place yet there isn't a better system. Here's hoping Mayor Bloomberg jumps into the contest. I kind of like Chris Christie also, DC could use some tough New Jersey love. The funny thing about the GOP their VP candidates in my opinion far outweigh the 4 presidential candidates they are tossing at us. The Indiana Gov is intriguing, Rubio is interesting. We ended up with the wrong Bush, I really like Jeb. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | Christie is giving out too much Jersey love. "New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie announced earlier this week that he plans to have the state's flags fly at half-staff in honor of Jersey native Whitney Houston, and on Thursday issued an executive order for the tribute to take place Friday." |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Lecak, could be hard to like a guy who lowered the flags to half-mast for Whitney Houston, and then tried lamely to justify it. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Ceres 73 posts | Lecak, You wrote, "We ended up with the wrong Bush". To be correct, you should have written...In my opinion, we ended up with the wrong Bush. I think W was right. In my opinion, I can't understand why you people from Las Vegas vote for Harry Reid when the rest of Nevada oposes him, and in my opinion he's terrible. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 you are correct, they do. What you have is the result of a divided government. Personally I hold Obama accountable for what's happened since he took office. I totally understand BO came into a bad situation but imo he's made it much worse. He came in with a lot of hype and a lot of high expectations--people were really counting on him. Even some of his supporters have now questioned him. This isn't a pitch for the GOP, it's just the reality as I see it. Reality also tells me no one is going to solve the fiscal issues we face. We have to look out for ourselves. Pols sure won't, no matter how much they promise us. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 Wayne 37 Men's 65 773 posts | So who is the "other white meat"? Three GOP candidates that have dropped out said they were told by God to run. Now birth control in the workplace is the "hot topic" of the remaining candidates. Rick Perry proved why they called Bush the "smart one". Gingrich is a lobbyist that wants to live in a moon colony. Romney is Robot Man. Rick Santorum hates anything "gay associated". Ron Paul is only "less insane" than the others. If these proud Americans want to be president, I can wait to see who they pick as their running mate. Common sense isn't so common~Voltaire. |
| Feb. 17, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | I also believe the 'system' went astray in '64 with the incorporation of the 'electoral college'. Popular vote by the voters no longer actually 'elects' the candidates. The EC does and that is controlled by a few and those few have the money which also controls how the votes are cast. Some honestly vote as they would, but overall just one way. One candidate already has 133 votes locked up according to some articles, and no votes are even cast yet for the real election. The 'fix' has been in since '64 on. |
| Feb. 18, 2012 Wayne 37 Men's 65 773 posts | @Ceres, So, President Larry the Cable Guy was the right choice to break the world? Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic. It's like the channel was stuck on Hee Haw for eight years. |
| Feb. 18, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Lecak, when you mentioned "we got the wrong Bush" it reminded me of a funny story. On a summer weekend in '89 after GHWB won the Presidency, the tourney team I was on was playing an out of town USSSA qualifier. We stunk the place up and went 0-2. Here we are, bunch of guys--no wives or girl friends, out of town on a saturday night--we're ready to party. It happened to be one of our teammates birthday so we decided we'd start the party by taking him to a local strip club--all nude. We pitched in and bought him a table dance. This dancer was FINE!! She's nude and almost in his face and he looks up at her and says, "I voted for the wrong Bush, I should have voted for your Bush" |
| Feb. 18, 2012 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | "The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are now outnumbered by those who vote for a living." -- Anonymous |
| Feb. 19, 2012 tater9 62 posts | The system has progressed to a level that makes it virtually impossible to manage effectively. This tends to create an atmosphere where you become reactive rather than proactive and that is a recipe for failure. |
| Feb. 19, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | salio2k I beleive that quote was authored by Judge Judy. |
| Feb. 19, 2012 SSUSA Staff 3483 posts | Thread closed for 'excessive pitch count' ... Please feel free to open Something I doubt you know about Congress...Part II |
