Well done, President Clinton. Well done.

Jakke

Pretty wisdomous
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
773
Location
In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
They can attempt to be, but at this point it's merely obstructionism. :lol:

I think you are confusing conservatism and leftism. Conservatism is the romantic idea of how it was in the good ol' days, which is by definition obstructionism. The GOP seems to want to at least take your country back to the 50's, and you dare to claim that the "left" (as you have no real left in the US) is obstructionist?

Secondly, how does being obstructionist keep one from being a patriot. And thus, by definition, the GOP should be the least patriotic party, since they are in fact obstructionist. Especially considering how those childish asses really went out of their way to block every democratic initiative in congress, which is not only assholery, but also obstructionistic. And that apparently makes them non-patriotic.
 

Jakke

Pretty wisdomous
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
773
Location
In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
Easy.
Because they are wannabe socialist. Obviously that is patriotic to you, but most of the country will disagree in November.

Well, I am not an american, so I don't care what is patriotic in your country.

Wannabe socialists, now we get back to that again. Do you understand what being a socialist means?
Socialist is not something you can use as a boogieman to smear opponents, it actually has meaning. I can tell you, you have no socialists in your congress, McCarthy persecuted them so hard in the 50's that the american left has not recovered yet.
What you have are libertarians, righ-wing, and less extreme right-wing. The less extreme right-wing is not left or socialist just because you say so. And don't even get me started on the american inability to differentiate between "left", "socialist" and "communist":noplease:
Don't you do some sort of social science in school?

Second, I would like to know what is innate in socialism that makes it obstructionist.
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Well, I am not an american, so I don't care what is patriotic in your country. I would like to know what is innate in socialism that makes it obstructionist.

This. The socialist led senate blocking the nation's path to prosperity.
Thats's obstructionism at it's filthy worst :cool:.

Senate Democrats reject House GOP budget plan | Fox News

and they also blocked Obama's budget plan as well.
Two years in a row now with 0 votes in favor for two straight years.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/227857-senate-rejects-obama-budget-in-99-0-vote/
 

Jakke

Pretty wisdomous
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
773
Location
In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
This. The socialist led senate blocking the nation's path to prosperity.
Thats's obstructionist at it's filthy worst :cool:.

Senate Democrats reject House GOP budget plan | Fox News

Nice choice of a balanced and nuanced news outlet there:yesway:
So your basic argument is that if someone does not vote for one of two equally bad alternatives, then they are obstructing? "Hey, what do you want to have, plague or cholera?"
"Well, I want neither!"
"Damn you, you obstructionist!"

I also like that you completely blew over me saying that you have no clue what a socialist is, only to start the next sentence with calling the democrats socialists. Is selective reading and hearing a common trait among american conservatives?
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Nice choice of a balanced and nuanced news outlet there:yesway:
So your basic argument is that if someone does not vote for one of two equally bad alternatives, then they are obstructing? "Hey, what do you want to have, plague or cholera?"
"Well, I want neither!"
"Damn you, you obstructionist!"

I also like that you completely blew over me saying that you have no clue what a socialist is, only to start the next sentence with calling the democrats socialists. Is selective reading and hearing a common trait among american conservatives?

Any news source will tell you that the senate blocked the budget plans of both the house and the president, so your news source point is moot.

This lines right up with what the Senate leadership and the President are after in the long run. So yes, I'm saying they are a group which aspires to move the country closer to socialism.
Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Jakke

Pretty wisdomous
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
773
Location
In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
This lines right up with what the Senate leadership and the President are after in the long run. So yes, I'm saying they are a group which aspires to move the country closer to socialism.
Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I am saying that that is a goddamm conspiracy theory on your part. You are mortally afraid of socialists, dislikes the democrats, thus you are inclined to believe that they are ultimately in for bringing Soviet into the US. The thing is that socialism isn't the baby-eating ideology you believe it to be. It's a completely valid political philosophy, so painting it like some nefarious scheme from the devil is not very thruthful, nor very informed.

The truth is that the US is so privatized that any attempt at owning something communally is going to stick out when it is released. If something is out of the ordinary, it is going to be noticed.
This does not mean that just because something is owned communally, communism is at the doorstep!
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
And I am saying that that is a goddamm conspiracy theory on your part. You are mortally afraid of socialists, dislikes the democrats, thus you are inclined to believe that they are ultimately in for bringing Soviet into the US. The thing is that socialism isn't the baby-eating ideology you believe it to be. It's a completely valid political philosophy, so painting it like some nefarious scheme from the devil is not very thruthful, nor very informed.

The truth is that the US is so privatized that any attempt at owning something communally is going to stick out when it is released. This does not mean that just because something is owned communally, communism is at the doorstep!

Fair enough, I admit that I believe what you say I do for the most part. :metal:
Obviously I think any move towards socialism, even if not a complete one, is bad for America and counter-productive to the very things that have made the nation a world leader.
 

Jakke

Pretty wisdomous
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
4,365
Reaction score
773
Location
In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
Fair enough, I admit that I believe what you say I do for the most part. :metal:

Well, we all do. I am more inclined to believe, if I am not careful, crazy stuff that I hear about religious people for example.

Obviously I think any move towards socialism, even if not a complete one, is bad for America and counter-productive to the very things that have made the nation a world leader.

And that's a completely valid opinion, and I respect your right to have it. I don't agree, but at least we can fight it out here:lol:
I would for example point to your strong position after WWII, and that this position made you prosporous. Just as it did for us (Sweden), and we were basically a DDR-light until the 80's. So if socialism were bad for a nation, we would have been in the shitter of the entire 20th century.
 

The Reverend

GHETTO KING OF SWAG
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,457
Reaction score
431
Location
Arlington, TX
Trench, I could just as easily dismiss everything you're saying as Republican talking points, so don't be so quick to dismiss others based on something as loose as that.

You were proven wrong about the statistics Clinton used in his speech, you gleefully and consistently equate other modes of thought with evil, and you're by far the least-insightful conservative member of this board. I have great respect for the other guys here, as their viewpoints are informed and their arguments and logic valid, something I cannot say about you, unfortunately, if your recent posting is to be taken as indicative of your political beliefs.

It is the blind obedience to a rigid set of ideals that Clinton referenced in his speech and you are putting on display that is sinking this country slowly into idiocy and decay, on both sides of the aisle. One of the things I found refreshing about Clinton's speech was the deliberate praise he gave to Reagan and Bush, Sr. for the positive things they accomplished in their presidencies. It's been a long time since I've heard a prominent conservative, news anchor, or even just average Republican give any left-leaning politicians kudos on anything.

If you think the American way of life was set in stone by the Founding Fathers, including what kind of economic system we'd have, and what extent if any the government would have in that, I encourage you to do more research. Not only did they have vicious disagreements, they also had much different ideas about how the country should work than most Constitution-humping talking heads do now. My point in bringing this up is that it is not "patriotic" to obstruct any measure that may help. We're bleeding out; it doesn't matter if the bandage we use isn't sterilized, it matters that we stop the bleeding. Neither party is willing to make that happen. I know just as many liberals with the same vitriolic disgust for conservative policies as you display towards liberal ones, and it depresses me much the same. Something needs to happen, and it's the duty of every citizen to think long and hard about how to effect that change. It's more than clear that no single initiative by any president or party has ever totally fixed any issue in our country's history. It is without fail a process. America is not a math problem to be solved, with a fixed solution. It's a living, breathing country, a reflexive being that needs constant tinkering and adjusting. The sooner you admit that, the better, because it means we are one person closer to restoring America to a healthier state.
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Trench, I could just as easily dismiss everything you're saying as Republican talking points, so don't be so quick to dismiss others based on something as loose as that.

You were proven wrong about the statistics Clinton used in his speech, you gleefully and consistently equate other modes of thought with evil, and you're by far the least-insightful conservative member of this board. I have great respect for the other guys here, as their viewpoints are informed and their arguments and logic valid, something I cannot say about you, unfortunately, if your recent posting is to be taken as indicative of your political beliefs.

It is the blind obedience to a rigid set of ideals that Clinton referenced in his speech and you are putting on display that is sinking this country slowly into idiocy and decay, on both sides of the aisle. One of the things I found refreshing about Clinton's speech was the deliberate praise he gave to Reagan and Bush, Sr. for the positive things they accomplished in their presidencies. It's been a long time since I've heard a prominent conservative, news anchor, or even just average Republican give any left-leaning politicians kudos on anything.

If you think the American way of life was set in stone by the Founding Fathers, including what kind of economic system we'd have, and what extent if any the government would have in that, I encourage you to do more research. Not only did they have vicious disagreements, they also had much different ideas about how the country should work than most Constitution-humping talking heads do now. My point in bringing this up is that it is not "patriotic" to obstruct any measure that may help. We're bleeding out; it doesn't matter if the bandage we use isn't sterilized, it matters that we stop the bleeding. Neither party is willing to make that happen. I know just as many liberals with the same vitriolic disgust for conservative policies as you display towards liberal ones, and it depresses me much the same. Something needs to happen, and it's the duty of every citizen to think long and hard about how to effect that change. It's more than clear that no single initiative by any president or party has ever totally fixed any issue in our country's history. It is without fail a process. America is not a math problem to be solved, with a fixed solution. It's a living, breathing country, a reflexive being that needs constant tinkering and adjusting. The sooner you admit that, the better, because it means we are one person closer to restoring America to a healthier state.

Well thanks, I appreciate your opinion also.
It seems Clinton was more than a bit deceptive though in making his pitch for an Obama re-election.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...5b9df68-f7e1-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html

Even politico has him leaving out many important and determining details in order to sell his often misleading "facts".
I guess that's just politics though lol.
 

canuck brian

Bowes Guitars
Contributor
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
902
Location
Toronto
Actually I've yet to hear anything you've posted be anything more than liberal talking point crap.

Not suprising that the liberal leftist squad enjoys you attempting to bash me, but that still doesn't get you anywhere in a crowd of patriotic americans.

Are you serious? Only Republicans are patriotic Americans?

Here. Let me ask the questions again that you are dismissing as "Liberal Talking"
points, or as I like to call it, calling Republican lackeys on their shit.

Are you going to address the glaring discrepancies between Ryan's platforms and Romney's or are you going to just flap your gums about the Democrats before even looking at the Republicans with the same lens? How about Romney pandering to the entirety of the Republicans in an almost absolute 180 of opinions on almost everything he apparently stood for?

In one paragraph, I asked for you to address the issues between the platforms of Romney and Ryan. The massive discrepancies between the two? Like the identical things that Ryan has that Obama has? The other thing was to address the savage level of flip flopping that Romney has done in recent years to accomodate pretty much every pivotal point that Republicans have....most people who read books and have attended school have learned the term "pandering" that you used recently and in this case, i'm applying it to the Republican Presidential candidate.

These SHOULD be easy points to address, but you're acting all butthurt and spouting off about how "Liberal Leftist" here enjoying this and once again, completely deflecting any attempt to show the Republican candidate doing ANYTHING including compromising his own previous ideals to get a vote.

You should probably refrain from using ridculous terminolgy to describe my logic as being "twisted" as the only things that you have to make this conclusion is that I think you're full of shit and that I'm posting said opinion in a public forum. There's also me believing that you are unable to answer a straight question but I can see where someone tugging the party line would take extreme offence to it.

If you're going to attack Clinton for his speech and promptly follow that up by holding a senile Clint Eastwood up for a talking point, you're pretty much annihilating any shred of credibility you might have conceived that you actually had.

So. Are you actually capable of addressing the original points?
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Are you serious? Only Republicans are patriotic Americans?

Here. Let me ask the questions again that you are dismissing as "Liberal Talking"
points, or as I like to call it, calling Republican lackeys on their shit.



In one paragraph, I asked for you to address the issues between the platforms of Romney and Ryan. The massive discrepancies between the two? Like the identical things that Ryan has that Obama has? The other thing was to address the savage level of flip flopping that Romney has done in recent years to accomodate pretty much every pivotal point that Republicans have....most people who read books and have attended school have learned the term "pandering" that you used recently and in this case, i'm applying it to the Republican Presidential candidate.

These SHOULD be easy points to address, but you're acting all butthurt and spouting off about how "Liberal Leftist" here enjoying this and once again, completely deflecting any attempt to show the Republican candidate doing ANYTHING including compromising his own previous ideals to get a vote.

You should probably refrain from using ridculous terminolgy to describe my logic as being "twisted" as the only things that you have to make this conclusion is that I think you're full of shit and that I'm posting said opinion in a public forum. There's also me believing that you are unable to answer a straight question but I can see where someone tugging the party line would take extreme offence to it.

If you're going to attack Clinton for his speech and promptly follow that up by holding a senile Clint Eastwood up for a talking point, you're pretty much annihilating any shred of credibility you might have conceived that you actually had.

So. Are you actually capable of addressing the original points?

As has been stated by the men themselves, they aren't even running on Ryan's "platform".
This is Mitt Romney's campaign. Anything that Ryan has endorsed is not in play unless they decide to change the ticket format.
Do there policy issues line up exactly? No of course they don't.
How many times in presidential election history have we had the #1 and #2 guys with an identical policy voting and legislating history?

Romney's is the only relevent platform in this debate.
Or I should say his vs Obama's.

I seriously doubt that Biden's voting history lines up perfectly with Obama's current platform.

Since Obama was voting "present" most of the time in the Senate, instead of making choices, then his record isn't much to begin with, which is more than I can say for his record as president.
 

canuck brian

Bowes Guitars
Contributor
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
3,630
Reaction score
902
Location
Toronto
Point one has been addressed. Please continue with the pandering and flip flopping of Romney on every single point of his previous campaigns (ie - abortion.).
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Point one has been addressed. Please continue with the pandering and flip flopping of Romney on every single point of his previous campaigns (ie - abortion.).

Well what he might say is that when governing Mass. he was there to represent the majority in a very liberal state, thereby conforming to the beliefs and preferences of his constituentcy was in the best interest of his state.

I personally don't care much about which side he has taken in the past or present concerning non-economic based issues. I don't care if he has changed his mind this week on abortion.
In fact, I hope he doesn't even get sucked into all those sorts of issues.
I'd be most happy if Washington would stay out of those things and pass a damn budget.

We (the USA) have been operating without any budget at all for 3yrs now.
Obama did submit a plan, so I'm putting most of the blame on the Senate, but that is the president's political party, and he did have control of the house and the senate for 2yrs.
If the Democrats can't work together even when they control all three spots, then what are we to expect for the next 4yrs if Obama was re-elected?
 

TRENCHLORD

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
246
Location
corncountry IL
Your ideal budget being what, double the military and eliminate everything else? :lol:

I don't have a budget (except; buy more gear, buy more gear :lol:).
It's those in Washington who must be held accountable for their lack of work and compromise, they did all apply/run for their respective jobs.
Military mite is a must though IMO. Peace through strength ala Reagan.
 


Top