[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Trump - Steely_D - May 2, 2024 - 10:57pm
 
RightWingNutZ - kurtster - May 2, 2024 - 10:37pm
 
Who Killed The Electric Car??? -- The Movie - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 2, 2024 - 9:51pm
 
Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 2, 2024 - 8:34pm
 
Name My Band - Manbird - May 2, 2024 - 7:37pm
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 5:56pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 5:46pm
 
Joe Biden - R_P - May 2, 2024 - 5:07pm
 
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful - thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 4:58pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - miamizsun - May 2, 2024 - 4:37pm
 
What Makes You Sad? - thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:35pm
 
songs that ROCK! - thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:07pm
 
Breaking News - thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 2:57pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - pilgrim - May 2, 2024 - 1:35pm
 
Israel - R_P - May 2, 2024 - 1:04pm
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 2, 2024 - 12:40pm
 
NYTimes Connections - Bill_J - May 2, 2024 - 12:35pm
 
NY Times Strands - Bill_J - May 2, 2024 - 12:19pm
 
Song of the Day - oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:27am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:17am
 
Questions. - oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:13am
 
What can you hear right now? - ScottFromWyoming - May 2, 2024 - 8:39am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - pilgrim - May 2, 2024 - 8:27am
 
The Obituary Page - Proclivities - May 2, 2024 - 7:42am
 
Main Mix Playlist - roadie - May 2, 2024 - 6:31am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - May 2, 2024 - 4:00am
 
And the good news is.... - Bill_J - May 1, 2024 - 6:30pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - ladron - May 1, 2024 - 6:22pm
 
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum - haresfur - May 1, 2024 - 5:49pm
 
Things you would be grating food for - Manbird - May 1, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
Economix - black321 - May 1, 2024 - 12:19pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 8:46pm
 
I Heart Huckabee - NOT! - Manbird - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:49pm
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Apr 30, 2024 - 6:34pm
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Apr 30, 2024 - 4:01pm
 
Oh, The Stupidity - haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 3:30pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:46pm
 
Canada - black321 - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:37pm
 
What Did You See Today? - Isabeau - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:15pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - miamizsun - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:02am
 
Food - Bill_J - Apr 29, 2024 - 7:46pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Apr 29, 2024 - 1:11pm
 
New Music - ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 11:36am
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 8:34am
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - rgio - Apr 29, 2024 - 7:37am
 
Photos you haven't taken of yourself - Antigone - Apr 29, 2024 - 5:03am
 
Britain - R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:47am
 
Birthday wishes - GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:56am
 
SCOTUS - Steely_D - Apr 28, 2024 - 1:44am
 
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 27, 2024 - 9:53pm
 
Classical Music - miamizsun - Apr 27, 2024 - 1:23pm
 
LeftWingNutZ - Lazy8 - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:46pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Red_Dragon - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:17pm
 
The Moon - KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:08pm
 
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance - fractalv - Apr 26, 2024 - 8:59pm
 
Musky Mythology - Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 7:23pm
 
Mini Meetups - Post Here! - Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 4:02pm
 
Australia has Disappeared - Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 2:41pm
 
Radio Paradise sounding better recently - firefly6 - Apr 26, 2024 - 10:39am
 
Neil Young - Steely_D - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:20am
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:01am
 
Environmental, Brilliance or Stupidity - miamizsun - Apr 26, 2024 - 5:07am
 
Poetry Forum - Manbird - Apr 25, 2024 - 12:30pm
 
Ask an Atheist - R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 11:02am
 
Afghanistan - R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:26am
 
Science in the News - Red_Dragon - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:00am
 
What the hell OV? - miamizsun - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:46am
 
The Abortion Wars - Isabeau - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:27am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - ColdMiser - Apr 25, 2024 - 7:15am
 
What's that smell? - Manbird - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:27pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:55am
 
TV shows you watch - Beaker - Apr 24, 2024 - 7:32am
 
China - R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 5:35pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - sunybuny - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:53am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Red_Dragon - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:42pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Congress Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Post to this Topic
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 29, 2011 - 7:25pm

 kurtster wrote:
I had the opportunity to hear and participate in a tele town hall with one of our Ohio Senators, Rob Portman, who was on the Super Committee, this evening.  It was quite an experience.  It involved the 7 major counties around Cleveland which are mostly Democrat.  We had several questions posed regarding certain aspects of our current state of affairs.  50% supported a Balanced Budget Amendment on one of the questions out of 5 possible choices in regards to dealing with the deficit.  Pretty impressive in an area that is about 75% Democrat.

The calls were live and unscreened.  He gave straight answers to mostly straight questions.  Surprisingly he was pretty centered in his thoughts.  He supported means testing for Medicare and Social Security.  He is opposed to a National Sales Tax, which I agree with and is more for an overhaul the tax code towards a flat tax.

The most important thing he mentioned about his participation on the SC was A) the total lack of involvement by Obama, even when Portman tried to contact Obama personally for input and B) (from his lips to my ears) that in regards to proposed new tax levels by the Democrats, the lowest number was $1 T in new taxes.  Sheesh.  The goal was to cut spending by $1.2 T, so that means that the highest net reduction proposed by the  D's was $.2 T or $200 B.  And the scope of that reduction was for 10 years ? 

What a flipping joke.

 

Hmmm . . . Rob Portman, ,one of the Republicans on the Super Committee, blames the Democrats for the failure. 
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 29, 2011 - 6:41pm

I had the opportunity to hear and participate in a tele town hall with one of our Ohio Senators, Rob Portman, who was on the Super Committee, this evening.  It was quite an experience.  It involved the 7 major counties around Cleveland which are mostly Democrat.  We had several questions posed regarding certain aspects of our current state of affairs.  50% supported a Balanced Budget Amendment on one of the questions out of 5 possible choices in regards to dealing with the deficit.  Pretty impressive in an area that is about 75% Democrat.

The calls were live and unscreened.  He gave straight answers to mostly straight questions.  Surprisingly he was pretty centered in his thoughts.  He supported means testing for Medicare and Social Security.  He is opposed to a National Sales Tax, which I agree with and is more for an overhaul the tax code towards a flat tax.

The most important thing he mentioned about his participation on the SC was A) the total lack of involvement by Obama, even when Portman tried to contact Obama personally for input and B) (from his lips to my ears) that in regards to proposed new tax levels by the Democrats, the lowest number was $1 T in new taxes.  Sheesh.  The goal was to cut spending by $1.2 T, so that means that the highest net reduction proposed by the  D's was $.2 T or $200 B.  And the scope of that reduction was for 10 years ? 

What a flipping joke.
cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 22, 2011 - 7:31am

 miamizsun wrote:
OK

Hello Ms Waitress, I'll have two more Coronas for Captain Islander and myself, please ma'am.
  Um, while you're up...


hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 22, 2011 - 7:02am

Super Committee Fails: Panel's End Run Around Democracy Fizzles


We can thank Grover Norquist for this.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Nov 20, 2011 - 7:30am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
Don't think they're doing nothing during this gridlocky period: They're going full speed ahead with the Ignoring What You Want thing...
 

House Resolution 3035, was introduced last month. It would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to allow automated calling to cell phones without a consumer's consent.

  •  Proponents have said automated calls could be used for such consumer-friendly features as reminding patients about a doctor appointment, alerting them to a flight delay or notifying them of a suspicion that their credit card has been compromised. Madigan said those calls can still be placed by live people instead of machines, or a consumer can give specific permission to auto-dial their cell phone.


for the record, we already can authorize robocalls from schools and doctors etc.
 
Of course they are.  They're doing what their employers want.
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 20, 2011 - 7:23am

Don't think they're doing nothing during this gridlocky period: They're going full speed ahead with the Ignoring What You Want thing...
 

House Resolution 3035, was introduced last month. It would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to allow automated calling to cell phones without a consumer's consent.

  •  Proponents have said automated calls could be used for such consumer-friendly features as reminding patients about a doctor appointment, alerting them to a flight delay or notifying them of a suspicion that their credit card has been compromised. Madigan said those calls can still be placed by live people instead of machines, or a consumer can give specific permission to auto-dial their cell phone.


for the record, we already can authorize robocalls from schools and doctors etc.
DaveInSaoMiguel

DaveInSaoMiguel Avatar

Location: No longer in a hovel in effluent Damnville, VA
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 27, 2011 - 12:12pm



kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 3:56pm

 dmax wrote:

The new party of Reagan

At Tuesday morning’s meeting of the House Democrats, caucus chairman John Larson rallied his colleagues for the day’s debt-limit debate by playing an audio recording of the 40th president.

“Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility,” Reagan says in the clip. “This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the federal deficit would soar. The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations.”

“Kind of sums things up,” Larson said, playing the same clip again at a news conference.

Nobody knows what Reagan, who died in 2004, would make of the current fight over the debt limit. But 100 years after Reagan’s birth, it’s clear that the Tea Party Republicans have little regard for the policies of the president they claim to venerate.

Tea Party Republicans call a vote to raise the debt ceiling a threat to their very existence; Reagan presided over 18 increases in the debt ceiling during his presidency.

Tea Party Republicans say they would sooner default on the national debt than raise taxes; Reagan agreed to raise taxes 11 times.

Tea Party Republicans, in “cut, cap and balance” legislation on the House floor Tuesday, voted to cut government spending permanently to 18 percent of gross domestic product; under Reagan, spending was as high as 23.5 percent and never below 21.3 percent of GDP.

That same legislation would take federal spending down to a level last seen in 1966, before Medicare was fully up and running; Reagan in 1988 signed a major expansion of Medicare.

Under the Tea Party Republicans’ spending cap, Reagan’s military buildup, often credited with winning the Cold War, would have been impossible.

No wonder Democrats on Tuesday were claiming the Republican icon as one of their own. After the caucus meeting with the Reagan clip, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) began the day’s debate by reading from a 1983 Reagan letter to Congress warning that “the full consequences of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate.”

“In the year of his 100th birthday, the Great Communicator might be amazed at how far his own image has shifted from the original,” Quigley charged. “He’d see his most dedicated followers using his name as justification for saying no to honoring our debts. He’d see his legacy used to play chicken with the world’s greatest economic engine.”

Republicans have continued their ritual praise of Reagan during the debt-limit fight. Rep.Trent Franks (Ariz.) claimed that the budget caps would allow America to be “that great city on a hill that Ronald Reagan spoke of.” Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) invoked Reagan’s belief that “the closest thing to eternal life on Earth is a federal government program.”Kevin Brady(Tex.) cited Reagan’s line that “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’ ” Both Steve King (Iowa) and Bobby Schilling (Ill.) informed the body that they had granddaughters named Reagan.

But while Reagan nostalgia endures, a number of Republicans have begun to admit the obvious: The Gipper would no longer be welcome on the GOP team. Most recently, Rep.Duncan Hunter Jr. (Calif.) called Reagan a “moderate former liberal . . . who would never be elected today in my opinion.” This spring, Mike Huckabee judged that “Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult, if not impossible time being nominated in this atmosphere,” pointing out that Reagan “raises taxes as governor, he made deals with Democrats, he compromised on things in order to move the ball down the field.”

During the debt-limit debate, a procession of Democrats — Vermont’s Peter Welch, Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen, New York’s Paul Tonko, Texas’s Sheila Jackson Lee and Gene Green — claimed Reagan’s support for their position. Reagan is “revered by many Democrats,” said Welch, who praised Reagan for fighting “the absurd notion that America had an option when it came to paying our bills.”

Half a century after he left the party, the Gipper is winning one for the Democrats.



 
I don't want to get partisan, but in order to answer you and your article, I must.

The Democratic Senate has not voted on and passed a budget in 811 days (that's 2 years and 81 days) according to Paul Ryan. 

The Democratic House did not bring up a budget for 2011, let alone vote on one.  The Republican House passed a Budget for 2012 in the spring, passed a bill called Cut, Cap and Balance which addresses some of the problems we are facing now.  Coburn in the Senate has pieced together some real reform legislation.  The Gang of Six solution is just a too late to the party knee jerk response that needs way more time to analyze than we have.  The House budget has not even been discussed in the Senate.

So if you want to try and be partisan, be honest.  Its the Democrats through shirking their fiscal responsibilty via Reid and Pelosi, who refused to even discuss budgets are clearly to blame for the brinksmanship we are facing right now.  They controlled the floors in each house, scheduling votes and debates and what even is allowed to be discussed on the floors of their respective chambers.  Had the Democrat Super Majority done its job and passed a budget in the first place, we would not be where we are today.  That can be considered a fact whether you or any one else likes it or not.  A budget would mean that we have something to refer to.   

So while the Repubs share responsibility for the problems we are facing, the brinksmanship is 100% Democrat.

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 3:33pm

 islander wrote:

I'd have to go check my notes, but I'm pretty sure I've said that Miami can speak for me.

 
OK

Hello Ms Waitress, I'll have two more Coronas for Captain Islander and myself, please ma'am.

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 2:36pm

 romeotuma wrote:

I agree completely...  I know what you mean...  I should not have been so glib with that quote...  but it made me giggle...

  Naw, it's cool. The quote is so incredibly arrogant it's hard not to laugh at.


cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 1:55pm

 romeotuma wrote:
Yeah, well said...
 
Sorry, but something about her works my last nerve. Maybe part of it is hearing all that claptrap from devotees. Funny how their tune changes when THEY get laid off.

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 1:41pm

 romeotuma wrote:
I'm not really either...  but I do dig that quote...  and I confess it made me giggle to post it...

I just think we should be careful about using the abstract "we"...  that pronoun addresses an abstract group of people, where specifics are far more effective...

it is good to see you here in paradise...  you are a good person...

  Fair enough, sometimes 'we' is not specific enough to be effective. But when I see that Ayn Rand nonsense, I think of something else that puts 'we', 'you' and 'I' into context.

We live in a society of laws. If you choose not to obey those laws and live in a world where you are the ultimate arbiter of what is right, that is your prerogative. But if you have that prerogative, so do I, and I choose to shoot you in the head. So Ms Rand, how's that whole 'I' thing working out for you now?

Dangerous amphetamine-addicted egomaniac. Brilliant, sure, but bat-shit crazy.


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 1:22pm

 romeotuma wrote:


The word "We" is as lime poured over men, which sets and hardens to stone, and crushes all beneath it, and that which is white and that which is black are lost equally in the grey of it. It is the word by which the depraved steal the virtue of the good, by which the weak steal the might of the strong, by which the fools steal the wisdom of the sages.

What is my joy if all hands, even the unclean, can reach into it? What is my wisdom, if even the fools can dictate to me? What is my freedom, if all creatures, even the botched and impotent, are my masters? What is my life, if I am but to bow, to agree and to obey?

But I am done with this creed of corruption.

I am done with the monster of "We," the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame.

And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god who will grant them joy and peace and pride.

This god, this one word:

"I."

-Ayn Rand

 

 


 

I'm not a fan of Ayn Rand.
(former member)

(former member) Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 12:59pm

The new party of Reagan

At Tuesday morning’s meeting of the House Democrats, caucus chairman John Larson rallied his colleagues for the day’s debt-limit debate by playing an audio recording of the 40th president.

“Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility,” Reagan says in the clip. “This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the federal deficit would soar. The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations.”

“Kind of sums things up,” Larson said, playing the same clip again at a news conference.

Nobody knows what Reagan, who died in 2004, would make of the current fight over the debt limit. But 100 years after Reagan’s birth, it’s clear that the Tea Party Republicans have little regard for the policies of the president they claim to venerate.

Tea Party Republicans call a vote to raise the debt ceiling a threat to their very existence; Reagan presided over 18 increases in the debt ceiling during his presidency.

Tea Party Republicans say they would sooner default on the national debt than raise taxes; Reagan agreed to raise taxes 11 times.

Tea Party Republicans, in “cut, cap and balance” legislation on the House floor Tuesday, voted to cut government spending permanently to 18 percent of gross domestic product; under Reagan, spending was as high as 23.5 percent and never below 21.3 percent of GDP.

That same legislation would take federal spending down to a level last seen in 1966, before Medicare was fully up and running; Reagan in 1988 signed a major expansion of Medicare.

Under the Tea Party Republicans’ spending cap, Reagan’s military buildup, often credited with winning the Cold War, would have been impossible.

No wonder Democrats on Tuesday were claiming the Republican icon as one of their own. After the caucus meeting with the Reagan clip, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) began the day’s debate by reading from a 1983 Reagan letter to Congress warning that “the full consequences of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate.”

“In the year of his 100th birthday, the Great Communicator might be amazed at how far his own image has shifted from the original,” Quigley charged. “He’d see his most dedicated followers using his name as justification for saying no to honoring our debts. He’d see his legacy used to play chicken with the world’s greatest economic engine.”

Republicans have continued their ritual praise of Reagan during the debt-limit fight. Rep.Trent Franks (Ariz.) claimed that the budget caps would allow America to be “that great city on a hill that Ronald Reagan spoke of.” Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) invoked Reagan’s belief that “the closest thing to eternal life on Earth is a federal government program.”Kevin Brady(Tex.) cited Reagan’s line that “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’ ” Both Steve King (Iowa) and Bobby Schilling (Ill.) informed the body that they had granddaughters named Reagan.

But while Reagan nostalgia endures, a number of Republicans have begun to admit the obvious: The Gipper would no longer be welcome on the GOP team. Most recently, Rep.Duncan Hunter Jr. (Calif.) called Reagan a “moderate former liberal . . . who would never be elected today in my opinion.” This spring, Mike Huckabee judged that “Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult, if not impossible time being nominated in this atmosphere,” pointing out that Reagan “raises taxes as governor, he made deals with Democrats, he compromised on things in order to move the ball down the field.”

During the debt-limit debate, a procession of Democrats — Vermont’s Peter Welch, Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen, New York’s Paul Tonko, Texas’s Sheila Jackson Lee and Gene Green — claimed Reagan’s support for their position. Reagan is “revered by many Democrats,” said Welch, who praised Reagan for fighting “the absurd notion that America had an option when it came to paying our bills.”

Half a century after he left the party, the Gipper is winning one for the Democrats.


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 11:20am

 rosedraws wrote:

This is also what kills the discussion (not just here).  I want some things explained to me by a conservative.  I don't want to be sniped at, or called a Kool Aid drinker.  I have questions about things like, gutting programs for less-priveleged kids.  It's WAY more expensive to deal with these kids when they cross paths with the law, than to help them find constructive things to do with their brains.  How can anyone justify slashing funding for programs that have undisputed results.  We pick up the tab for the negative results... why are we reluctant to pay the tab for interventions that create positive results?  Is this current congress really satisfied with simply kicking the can down the road for some future congress to deal with? 

I sound like I'm ranting (some of it's just lack of face time), but I think these are legitimate questions that I wish I could get answers for. 
 

Indeed, answers are what we all should be looking for wherever we may be able to find them. And that entails considering possible answers instead of rejecting them out of hand. 

I'm always amazed when folk, by word and deed, seem to believe the answers are readily apparent for even the most labyrinthine of issues. 

What you are talking about are long-term versus short-term solutions.  Sometimes, the boundary lines between those merge. Other times, they drift apart like giant icebergs looking for a Titanic.

The budget discussions are like that.  I like to think long-term, but recognize that we can't ignore the short-term peril.  A tough balancing act in this instance.  

    
islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 10:41am

 romeotuma wrote:

"We"?  You are sounding awful schizophrenic...


 
I'd have to go check my notes, but I'm pretty sure I've said that Miami can speak for me.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 10:15am

 oldslabsides wrote:
Nothing is going to change until enough of the populace realizes that it's all a dog & pony show and stop playing the game.
 
We're all been conditioned/trained to not understand the real underlying (root) causes.

We all recognize the symptoms, but when they come up we can't put them into context

And if we don't really grasp the hows and whys and frame them properly, we'll go round and round.

Exchanging one bad boss for another bad boss is what we've been doing.

rosedraws

rosedraws Avatar

Location: close to the edge
Gender: Female


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 10:02am

 steeler wrote:
There are those who are absolutely convinced that government spending designed to spur the economy will not work, and will only add to the deficit with nothing to show for it. And vice versa. There are those who are absolutely convinced that tax cuts will spur the economy, and that tax increases of any sort will tie an anchor around the ankle of any growth. And vice versa.

 
This is also what kills the discussion (not just here).  I want some things explained to me by a conservative.  I don't want to be sniped at, or called a Kool Aid drinker.  I have questions about things like, gutting programs for less-priveleged kids.  It's WAY more expensive to deal with these kids when they cross paths with the law, than to help them find constructive things to do with their brains.  How can anyone justify slashing funding for programs that have undisputed results.  We pick up the tab for the negative results... why are we reluctant to pay the tab for interventions that create positive results?  Is this current congress really satisfied with simply kicking the can down the road for some future congress to deal with? 

I sound like I'm ranting (some of it's just lack of face time), but I think these are legitimate questions that I wish I could get answers for. 

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 10:02am

 rosedraws wrote:
I heard last night NPR talking about a "gang of 6"... 3 dems and 3 repubs who have been meeting and came up with a plan that both sides are excited about.

Any more word on this?

 

Still in the talking stage.  Hard details will not be able to be worked out in time to vote and pass before the August 2 deadline.  Look for it to be another last minute deal where we have to pass it to find out what is in it.

We can't be doing things like this anymore. 
cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 20, 2011 - 9:58am

 rosedraws wrote:
I heard last night NPR talking about a "gang of 6"... 3 dems and 3 repubs who have been meeting and came up with a plan that both sides are excited about.

Any more word on this?

  CNN seems to be indicating they are back, working on a plan. One that includes lots of cuts, and some increased revenues also. Who knows? They're all just rearranging the deck chairs anyway...

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next