Liberals and conservatives

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2014 4:48:07 GMT -5 @racersedge said:

www.teaparty-platform.com/

Yes this is pure insanity. What would anyone not agree with?

I guess I should be considered a #hater because I don't agree with MP or SF on politics.

The "hate" only comes from you guys - out of the frustration I know you must feel since you can't snswer our questions. See my previous post to the Rat. I don't know you well enough to learn to hate you. If that is a risk, then we can keep the separation - hate serves no good purpose, e.g., the Republican AND Tea Party hatred of all things Obama is a good metric for that statement.

One of the earlier posts pointed out that the media seems to back Obama with the exception of Fox and some radio talk shows. Said another way - the media, sans Fox and Fox outlet radio stations, report fairly - yes, fairly - all aspects of the story. They are not influenced and financed by the pure unadulterated hate embodied in Roger Ailes. Go read about the Fox puppet master. Like I've said many times before - hard to believe all but one media outlet (tv and print media included) get together on EVERY story, fabricate a common pro-Obama spin, report it that way while Fox puts out the "truth" as Roger sees it.

[CellarRat]

Jan 27, 2014 6:15:43 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Jan 27, 2014 4:48:07 GMT -5 @racersedge said:

www.teaparty-platform.com/

Yes this is pure insanity. What would anyone not agree with?

I guess I should be considered a #hater because I don't agree with MP or SF on politics.

The "hate" only comes from you guys - out of the frustration I know you must feel since you can't snswer our questions. See my previous post to the Rat. I don't know you well enough to learn to hate you. If that is a risk, then we can keep the separation - hate serves no good purpose, e.g., the Republican AND Tea Party hatred of all things Obama is a good metric for that statement.

One of the earlier posts pointed out that the media seems to back Obama with the exception of Fox and some radio talk shows. Said another way - the media, sans Fox and Fox outlet radio stations, report fairly - yes, fairly - all aspects of the story. They are not influenced and financed by the pure unadulterated hate embodied in Roger Ailes. Go read about the Fox puppet master. Like I've said many times before - hard to believe all but one media outlet (tv and print media included) get together on EVERY story, fabricate a common pro-Obama spin, report it that way while Fox puts out the "truth" as Roger sees it.

This is just not honest. The emotion, hate, and divisive tactics has come from the liberals, progressives, communists- whatever u guys are at the moment. See the folks mentioned above. The administration doesn't want any dissent- doesn't this bother you. When Obama first started making comments about some media and it's credibility I got very concerned. You should have as well. Your objectivity is activated only when there is a R in office.

You expect conservatives to support a president and an administration that is further left than any president to date. Then your retort is they are against anything that is "Obama". Well, of course they are. I know what the implications are you guys are cowards. Just say it, if you disagree with this administration you are a racist. The problem you have there is that many, many backers of the tea party and it's principles are minorities.

[SaintsFan]

Jan 27, 2014 6:44:15 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

Jan 27, 2014 6:15:43 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

The "hate" only comes from you guys - out of the frustration I know you must feel since you can't snswer our questions. See my previous post to the Rat. I don't know you well enough to learn to hate you. If that is a risk, then we can keep the separation - hate serves no good purpose, e.g., the Republican AND Tea Party hatred of all things Obama is a good metric for that statement.

One of the earlier posts pointed out that the media seems to back Obama with the exception of Fox and some radio talk shows. Said another way - the media, sans Fox and Fox outlet radio stations, report fairly - yes, fairly - all aspects of the story. They are not influenced and financed by the pure unadulterated hate embodied in Roger Ailes. Go read about the Fox puppet master. Like I've said many times before - hard to believe all but one media outlet (tv and print media included) get together on EVERY story, fabricate a common pro-Obama spin, report it that way while Fox puts out the "truth" as Roger sees it.

This is just not honest. The emotion, hate, and divisive tactics has come from the liberals, progressives, communists- whatever u guys are at the moment. See the folks mentioned above. The administration doesn't want any dissent- doesn't this bother you. When Obama first started making comments about some media and it's credibility I got very concerned. You should have as well. Your objectivity is activated only when there is a R in office.

You expect conservatives to support a president and an administration that is further left than any president to date. Then your retort is they are against anything that is "Obama". Well, of course they are. I know what the implications are you guys are cowards. Just say it, if you disagree with this administration you are a racist. The problem you have there is that many, many backers of the tea party and it's principles are minorities.

McCarthy running wild in this thread

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2014 6:44:15 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

Jan 27, 2014 6:15:43 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

The "hate" only comes from you guys - out of the frustration I know you must feel since you can't snswer our questions. See my previous post to the Rat. I don't know you well enough to learn to hate you. If that is a risk, then we can keep the separation - hate serves no good purpose, e.g., the Republican AND Tea Party hatred of all things Obama is a good metric for that statement.

One of the earlier posts pointed out that the media seems to back Obama with the exception of Fox and some radio talk shows. Said another way - the media, sans Fox and Fox outlet radio stations, report fairly - yes, fairly - all aspects of the story. They are not influenced and financed by the pure unadulterated hate embodied in Roger Ailes. Go read about the Fox puppet master. Like I've said many times before - hard to believe all but one media outlet (tv and print media included) get together on EVERY story, fabricate a common pro-Obama spin, report it that way while Fox puts out the "truth" as Roger sees it.

This is just not honest. The emotion, hate, and divisive tactics has come from the liberals, progressives, communists- whatever u guys are at the moment. See the folks mentioned above. The administration doesn't want any dissent- doesn't this bother you. When Obama first started making comments about some media and it's credibility I got very concerned. You should have as well. Your objectivity is activated only when there is a R in office.

You expect conservatives to support a president and an administration that is further left than any president to date. Then your retort is they are against anything that is "Obama". Well, of course they are. I know what the implications are you guys are cowards. Just say it, if you disagree with this administration you are a racist. The problem you have there is that many, many backers of the tea party and it's principles are minorities.

Constructive response, thanks! Calling me dishonest, a coward and then to attribute calling any administration dissenters racists - sad. I don't think that way. Race has nothing to do with it. If Obama was red, white or blue you guys would decry anything his administration tried to put forward for the good of the country.

Here are some ideas that I would like implemented - strong term limits (max of two terms for a senator and three terms for a House member). Limits on ALL campaign contributions - allow big corporations to donate IF AND ONLY IF they have a facility in the district (House) or state (Senate) the candidate is running in. Disallow corporate contributions from companies with direct contracts with the Government. Collectively, these changes would restore integrity and honesty to a totally disheveled Congress and elect representatives that truly represent the people that voted for them and not the ones that bought them. Do any of these ideas seem liberal to you?

Thank you for stepping up and admitting that the TP and right wing conservatives are against anything Obama - obstructionism is the mantra of the right.

As to Obama being "further left than any president to date" - what exactly is the metric you are using. If you take the scale from liberal to conservative and then recognize that the conservative side of the scale has gotten pushed even further to the right with an attendant shift of the middle also to the right (simple geometry) then the left side of the scale would appear to have moved but only in a relative sense. The contrast between the extreme right wing (a reality that you seem to embrace and have no problem with) and the left is so stark that any comparison should result in the conclusion that the left if much further away from the new right (and it is, thankfully) - even without any significant change in liberal thinking or actions.

Still waiting on Ideas, specifics, etc.

[CellarRat]

You obviously have not read any of the previous posts. Just a stubborn lib, no surprise.

With regard to corporations - I agree for the most part. Corporations are not people in my mind, despite what the Supreme Court says. However, you always fail to mention the other side of the equation. That being unions. Same rules should apply to them. Unions are not people either.

What "metric" am I using? Obama and his followers are big government socialists. That is what you want, I get it. You don't want "America" you want Western Europe. Okay I get it. Some people like America, and did not think it needed to be fundamentally changed. I Didn't think we need to add obamacare to the every expanding duties of our government, you do. I get it. I disagree.

"Extreme right" is your label. Are you calling me a nazi? I am a fiscal conservative, libertarian. Try to remember that.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2014 7:40:37 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

You obviously have not read any of the previous posts. Just a stubborn lib, no surprise.

With regard to corporations - I agree for the most part. Corporations are not people in my mind, despite what the Supreme Court says. However, you always fail to mention the other side if the equation. That being unions. Same rules should apply to them. Unions are not people either.

What "metric" am I using. Obama and his followers are big government socialists. That is what you want, I get it. You don't want "America" you want Western Europe. Okay I get it. Some people like America, and did not think it needed to be fundamentally changed. I Didn't think we need to add obamacare to the every expanding duties of our government, you do. I get it. I disagree.

"Extreme right" is your label. Are you calling me a nazi? I am a fiscal conservative, libertarian. Try to remember that.

Nice head fake - doesn't work - I've carefully read all of the posts. You obviously haven't because you haven't answered one question with anything but insults and baseless characterizations.

The union members, as citizens in the representative's district can contribute on their own. I would subject the union's organizational contribution to the same limits and criteria as the corporate contributions. If the company gets to contribute on its own, the union representing its employees should have the same regionally specific right.

Which specific features of Obamacare do you want repealed? If you say the entire program you are saying you don't want preexisting conditions covered, you want insurance companies to be able to drop people when illness is discovered, you don't want access to health care for those that aren't fortunate enough to be able to access it through their employer, you want prescription costs for the elderly to go up, you want to eliminate competition and let rate setting revert back to the insurance companies with no market forces in play .....

Nazi!! Glad to see you don't make personal attacks. As SF said - McCarthyism is raging on the right again. To even hint that I'm calling you a Nazi is beyond any stretch of imagination - I must be winning the argument for you to crawl even deeper into your cellar to come up with that.

You told me to remember that you are a fiscal conservative and libertarian. I will add that to my mental image of you - so far I've got fiscal conservative, libertarian, Siena fan (how am I doing so far?), young, healthy (possibly with a health insurance package from your employer), materialistic, idealistic, closed minded and naïve. Have I missed any?

[CellarRat]

Eventually the money runs out.


nyp.st/1jzm6EL

[glen]

MP - I like your ideas on term limits and campaign finance. Good stuff and I believe it would help.

As for the media - it is all slanted. I just find it funny that the left blasts 1 station (FOX) + talk radio. On the flip side - CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc. are all aligned. Quite frankly I'd like anyone on the left to show any evidence of even an attempt at unbiased reporting by MSNBC. Say what you want about Fox but they at least have people on for an alternate opinion.

Interesting the about the continuum of far left and far right... It is more of a curve (circle) than a straight line. In the common view far left is communism with the far right being nazi-ism. From what I can tell, these aren't so much opposites as degrees of separation. In the circle analogy far left would be at 359 degees and far right at 1 degree (trying for a visual here). As a straight line view I'd put far left and far right on the same side of the equation and what I'll call "classic liberal" and conservative on the other side of the line. If you look at Nazi-ism and communism, their methods and tactics and totalitarian control and are not too far apart. Similarly, "classic liberals" are very libertarian and ...dare I say it... somewhat conservative - the difference generally being the guns vs butter positions.

I guess my point is that instead of calling names and labeling people extreme (as a way of discrediting everything they say to follow) we should note that we're not all that far apart. There are some key issues which are fundamental for sure though. I think part of the problem now is that we're getting to a zero sum game. In the past the pie was always getting bigger so it was easier to come to a compromise with all parties getting something. Now it is harder. If R's get, D's don't and vice versa. That make compromise difficult. It is even harder if one side believes more govt is the answer and the other side believes less is. What's the compromise on that? Not sure there is one.

[CellarRat]

Obamacare is just another expansion of government. A dishonest policy forwarded by the dems to redistribute wealth. As we are all seeing, it is not working and it's very expensive.

Your rants are humorous. Your characterization of me is insulting and incorrect.
I believe in a world where people can be what they want to be- freedom. You believe in a world where people are what the government wants them to be.

[glen]

MP - I just read your followup. I do like your posts. I have a differing opinion though.

Repeal of OCare is reasonable. That doesn't mean some of the provisions aren't reasonable (cover pre-existing for example). But the premise of OCare is flawed. Another option is to have MORE free market. Coverage across state lines, etc. Additionally, moving from employer based coverage would be good. Why should my coverage change when I change jobs? That's always struck me as a bad thing...esp if you find yourself sans employer. What I just saw is the classic straw man argument. I'd like a few D's to acknowledge that every flaw we're seeing in OCare was predicted by conservatives years ago. You know, the ones with "no ideas" aka the ones literally locked out of the room during discussions.

Regarding unions, I believe private sector unions are fine. Public sector is another story. I'd probably restrict political contributions unless membership was voluntary. I see the combination of forced unionization + political contributions as a huge problem.

[Deleted]

Glen, I respect your differing opinions. The ability to have and voice them is the cornerstone of this great nation. Can you point out the actual flaws in the Obamacare plan for me? The rollout was a disaster, no disagreement there but that was due to inept planning re such a large multi-state on-line system and not due to any of the actual elements of Obamacare as I see it. Many of the features were implemented a year or so ago and no complaints on any of that. We keep hearing the inflammatory "redistribution of wealth" characterization - coined to be a hot button icon. Allocation of collected taxes to areas where there is a need is the reality (although one can debate ad nauseum the "need" definition) but it doesn't garner the "flavor" the fiscal conservatives seem to relish. CellarRat talks about socialism and that Obamacare is a further expansion of Government. Well, Medicare is certainly a socialistic-like program and you don't hear many complaints about it. One of my favorite quotes from an opponent of Obamacare was - don't let the Government mess with my Medicare. Laughable while at the same time very sad and an indictment of how ill informed many are. I paid over my career for Medicare and pay for it now and it works fine. Obamacare is not a government run program it ia s program mandated by the government to provide closure in the many costly holes in our health care system. There are no Government run Murder Boards or Government workers reviewing health insurance claims. They are still being reviewed as they always were by the insurance company bean counters albeit with some restrictions on what they can do to the insured.

I completely agree with you on public sector unions. The private sector unions have over the years gone from being very necessary to protect workers to being self-serving and destructive - how many manufacturing jobs have we lost due to unions being unwilling to make any necessary concessions to maintain a company's viability? The answer - Too many. The public sector unions have contributed to the significant decline in our education system, IMO. Unions rule the classrooms. Lousy teachers are protected and maintained in their positions. Mandating political contributions to any degree at all is just not right. I believe union membership should be optional and, if that happened, you'd see a decline in the number of members and the union's overall control of the employment landscape.

So many things that need fixing yet we spend time worrying about insignificant issues with jazzy political appeal.

I'm guessing we won't see any bullets from the Rat. The only bullets he might have are likely in the AK-47 or AR-15 on his mantle. Those are the weapons are forefathers envisioned as being necessary to protect our citizens from the Government they designed and implemented. There is probably a picture of Adams or Jefferson on the mantle next to the pile of loaded magazines.....

[CellarRat]

MP

Most conservatives would support glens positions. Most would not support yours.

I don't own a gun. I never even fired one, but I do support the 2nd amendment. No camo.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2014 10:41:34 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

MP

Most conservatives would support glens positions. Most would not support yours.

And your point is? By your own admission, some would!

[CellarRat]

Jan 27, 2014 10:44:51 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Jan 27, 2014 10:41:34 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

MP

Most conservatives would support glens positions. Most would not support yours.

And your point is? By your own admission, some would!

Well you surprisingly stated some conservative positions that I can support. But for the most part, you are just a big government, higher taxes, class warfare guy, I'm not.

You talk about people liking their social security and Medicare. you realize that the deduction from the employee and the contribution from an employer is mandatory. It is not a voluntary system, just like obamacare. To state that people like a program that they are forced to contribute to is dishonest.

Just more silly arguments from the lefty.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2014 11:01:46 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

Jan 27, 2014 10:44:51 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

And your point is? By your own admission, some would!

Well you surprisingly stated some conservative positions that I can support. But for the most part, you are just a big government, higher taxes, class warfare guy, I'm not.

You talk about people liking their social security and Medicare. you realize that the deduction from the employee and the contribution from an employer is mandatory. It is not a voluntary system, just like obamacare. To state that people like a program that they are forced to contribute to is dishonest.

Just more silly arguments from the lefty.

There you go, putting words in my posts! Show me where I said people like their social security. It is probably more true than not, but tell me where I said that. No one said either SS or Medicare contributions were not mandatory. FYI, some post-retirement Medicare options are just that, optional and yes, we have to pay for that protection. Obamacare is not mandatory. I'm not using any of it. You don't have to either, just pay the penalty for not having insurance. Those that don't have insurance suck on the public teat when they do get sick and go into an ER and must receive treatment and we all get to pay for that service indirectly. Guess that makes more sense to you. Putting a penalty on not having health insurance is a way to recoup some of those costs at least on the Government's ledger (= some impact on the deficit which you should be supporting). People rely on social security, especially since so many companies in their kind and benevolent ways have done away with pension plans. The myth that 401K's replace the old pension plans will be exposed as more and more people find out they have very inadequate retirement funds even in their maxed out 401K plans. No dishonesty there. What lies have you heard?

More empty rhetoric from a righty! Did you know that lefty pitchers have more job security in the majors than their righty counterparts? Must be a hidden meaning in there somewhere. I feel bad for all of those Catholic little leaguers who were initially left handed and then had their knuckles repeatedly rapped by Sister Mary-Beat-Out-The-Devil until they changed their sinful ways and became right handed. Maybe if there were more leftys in the majors there would be reduced wealth redistribution........