# OK Tea Party....Time to belly up to the bar



## rightwinger

Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.

Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?

How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.

I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against


----------



## Revere

It's not the "same old city."  Obama has made it bigger and more powerful than every before.


----------



## California Girl

"Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'. 

Live with it.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely. When Government Workers swear Allegiance to the Union, it would be so nice that they were referring to the USA, let's remove the temptation. Unions are obsolete, at least their legal activity and function.

Government Salaries and hours worked per week is questionable. Extended vacation time. Waste Waste Waste.

You seem to put so much faith in Tea Party Members that hold office, how many do you think there are? Or are you just being silly? I thought so. 

I'm looking at the opportunity to see the various levels of Government, start applying some real Federalism, where things are experimented with, tried, and refined at the State levels, rather than one size fits all Centralized Legislation that does not adapt to concern or need. Governing isn't always about what is convenient for the Governing Body Itself. It gets lazy and sloppy that way. Governing is about maintaining and applying proper remedy. It is Government that is supposed to adapt to circumstance and correctly apply through reason, not expect reality to bend to it's will without question.


----------



## Mini 14

I don't think anyone is going to tell Rand Paul what to do, or how to do it. If you think he's going to go up to Washington and disappear, you have a VERY rude awakening coming.


----------



## Stephanie

LOL, full of retoric and bumper slogan stickers.

HOPE AND CHANGE BABY.
Hit the D an drive a car off in a ditch.
They have to get in the back.
I WON!!!!

oh wait, that was the Democrats-Progressives-Commies and the Boykings slogans and bumper sticker BS rhetoric....


----------



## editec

I too will be interested in seeing what the revived GOP will do with its control over the House.

I suspect that our TEA PARTY folks are going to be sorely disappointed when they finally realize that its going to be business as usual in Washington.

They are going to be, much as the right wing evangelists were, shocked when they see that the RNC leopard isn't going to change its spots.

But time will tell.

I see gridlock.

And before some of you cheer that gridlock, know that gridlock means that the tax cuts will automatically be repealed, and that the Obama HC plan will go into effect, too.

There's soemthing there for everybody to hate.


----------



## asterism

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



That is an interesting question and I don't know the answer.

Cap and trade isn't part of it, and neither is the public option.  It's not much, but it's a start.


----------



## Stephanie

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> *I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against*



yeah and you did YOUR part to keep it that way. rooting on every corrupted lying person with a D next to their name and running down every new name Republican, just to SAVE your party.
so you don't have any ROOM to speak.


----------



## Intense

Mini 14 said:


> I don't think anyone is going to tell Rand Paul what to do, or how to do it. If you think he's going to go up to Washington and disappear, you have a VERY rude awakening coming.



 I don't think Anyone looks all that good leashed.


----------



## Cuyo

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



One can only hope they'll realize our problems are far more complex than they thought, and the solution isn't short enough to fit on a bumper sticker.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.


----------



## bodecea

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



I look forward to them fixing things in this nation.   I will not be an obstructionist.   Let them at it.


----------



## The Rabbi

Hmm, let's see.  Obama and Democrats ran in '08 on a bunch of slogans.  They took control of both houses of Congress and the White House by filibuster proof majorities.  Yet Nutwinger never called on them to stand and deliver.  And when they did, the country got in a worse mess than ever.
Now the GOP has control of the House and he challenges them to start governing like they staged a coup.
Memo: Dems still control the Senate and Obama is still the president.
My question is: OK Dems.  You've lost control of the House but still have a big role in government.  What are you going to do to solve all these problems?


----------



## Cuyo

Lonestar_logic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
Click to expand...


Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.

Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.


----------



## WillowTree

bodecea said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I look forward to them fixing things in this nation.   I will not be an obstructionist.   Let them at it.
Click to expand...


Caleeeeefornication? Same ole shit, different day. and you walk around I bet looking all


----------



## theHawk

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Easy, repeal Obamacare.  Stop all "stimulous" spending.  Freeze and roll back spending budgets to 2008 levels immediately.  Cut welfare, if not totally eliminate it.  Scale back and cut spending to every single Fed agency except DoD and DoJ.


----------



## Sallow

Same old crap different day.

You guys are talking about labor unions and big government. Okay. First off "getting rid of the unions" would be Unconstitutional. Period. And it won't save a dime. Neither will cutting pay from government workers.

The real cost is in Medicare, Military and Vets.

Not "earmarks" which are actually pretty cheap and get stuff built..something Americans have stopped doing.

So..what about Seniors, Veterans and Troops do you guys wanna cut?


----------



## Cuyo

theHawk said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy, repeal Obamacare.  Stop all "stimulous" spending.  Freeze and roll back spending budgets to 2008 levels immediately.  Cut welfare, if not totally eliminate it.  Scale back and cut spending to every single Fed agency except DoD and DoJ.
Click to expand...


You haven't even _scratched_ the deficit with that suggestion.



> Easy,



No, it isn't.  That's the point we're trying to make.


----------



## Sallow

theHawk said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy, repeal Obamacare.  Stop all "stimulous" spending.  Freeze and roll back spending budgets to 2008 levels immediately.  Cut welfare, if not totally eliminate it.  Scale back and cut spending to every single Fed agency except DoD and DoJ.
Click to expand...


Repeal "Obamacare"? Thats a joke. It's scored as actually saving money.

And Stimulus? You wanna raise taxes? Half the stimulus came in the form of tax cuts.

Welfare? It was reformed..and doesn't cost all that much.

The DOD IS WHAT REALLY COSTS ALOT!


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely. When Government Workers swear Allegiance to the Union, it would be so nice that they were referring to the USA, let's remove the temptation. Unions are obsolete, at least their legal activity and function.
> 
> Government Salaries and hours worked per week is questionable. Extended vacation time. Waste Waste Waste.
> 
> You seem to put so much faith in Tea Party Members that hold office, how many do you think there are? Or are you just being silly? I thought so.
> 
> I'm looking at the opportunity to see the various levels of Government, start applying some real Federalism, where things are experimented with, tried, and refined at the State levels, rather than one size fits all Centralized Legislation that does not adapt to concern or need. Governing isn't always about what is convenient for the Governing Body Itself. It gets lazy and sloppy that way. Governing is about maintaining and applying proper remedy. It is Government that is supposed to adapt to circumstance and correctly apply through reason, not expect reality to bend to it's will without question.
Click to expand...


Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely. When Government Workers swear Allegiance to the Union, it would be so nice that they were referring to the USA, let's remove the temptation. Unions are obsolete, at least their legal activity and function

_  I think you overestimate the strength of Federal Government Unions. From personal experience they have very little strength. Government salaries are set by law and are not subject to negotiation. The pay structure and promotion guidelines are also established by law.Government employees are prohibited by law from striking so they have no bargaining chips in negotiation. The only thing Government unions can negotiate are working conditions._

Government Salaries and hours worked per week is questionable. Extended vacation time. Waste Waste Waste.

_Government salaries and annual pay increases are established by a formula set by Congress. As in most things government, it is very slow to react to changes in prevailing wages. Generally, when wages skyrocket, government salaries and the ability to hire competitively suffer. When the economy crashes, government wages and ability to hire highly qualified employess increase.
Vacation time is the same that it has been for over 50 years_

You seem to put so much faith in Tea Party Members that hold office, how many do you think there are? Or are you just being silly? I thought so. 

_The point is that I do not have much faith. I think they are in for a rude awakening on what it takes to get things done in Washington. I don't think cutting that budget is as easy as they think_


Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely. When Government Workers swear Allegiance to the Union, it would be so nice that they were referring to the USA, let's remove the temptation. Unions are obsolete, at least their legal activity and function

_As I stated above, Government Unions (AFGE and NFFE) are a sham and have little influence. Unions as a whole in this country are weak. In a booming economy, unions have power. In a recession, they give back benefits to save jobs. _


----------



## rightwinger

Mini 14 said:


> I don't think anyone is going to tell Rand Paul what to do, or how to do it. If you think he's going to go up to Washington and disappear, you have a VERY rude awakening coming.



Rand Paul is a Freshman Senator from Kentucky. If he thinks he can enter the Senate and start giving orders he will be sadly disappointed. 

If Paul believes he can go to Washington and say "I am a Tea Party member and here is what I want" HE is the one in for a VERY rude awakening. The Tea Party is a segment of the larger Republican Party and the Republican Party is still a minority in the Senate. Unless he learns how to negotiate and pass legislation he will be just a talking head on the nightly Fox News broadcast.


----------



## G.T.

California Girl said:


> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.



This basically ignores reality. Do we have to get video of him saying what "can what," was, and compare it to all the Legislation he signed, or...............no?


----------



## topspin

the only reason the senate was held is only 1/3 was up for election. When you have democrats firing guns through bills I wouldn't be poking my liberal chest out. Democrats are going to kneel to the tea party.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
Click to expand...


OMG! Is the sky falling! 

No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?


----------



## Intense

topspin said:


> the only reason the senate was held is only 1/3 was up for election. When you have democrats firing guns through bills I wouldn't be poking my liberal chest out. Democrats are going to kneel to the tea party.



We don't want them to kneel. We want them to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do.


----------



## topspin

Intense said:


> topspin said:
> 
> 
> 
> the only reason the senate was held is only 1/3 was up for election. When you have democrats firing guns through bills I wouldn't be poking my liberal chest out. Democrats are going to kneel to the tea party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We don't want them to kneel. We want them to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do.
Click to expand...


 Just an expression, that are going to run from Obama into the arms of fiscal sanity.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Mini 14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think anyone is going to tell Rand Paul what to do, or how to do it. If you think he's going to go up to Washington and disappear, you have a VERY rude awakening coming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rand Paul is a Freshman Senator from Kentucky. If he thinks he can enter the Senate and start giving orders he will be sadly disappointed.
> 
> If Paul believes he can go to Washington and say "I am a Tea Party member and here is what I want" HE is the one in for a VERY rude awakening. The Tea Party is a segment of the larger Republican Party and the Republican Party is still a minority in the Senate. Unless he learns how to negotiate and pass legislation he will be just a talking head on the nightly Fox News broadcast.
Click to expand...


Down Spot! Sit! Lie down! Roll over! Good Boy!!! Be nice to the Man.


----------



## drsmith1072

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



They are good at stating vague generalitites but I seriously doubt that most of the responses that you get will have any specifics. 

Yeah they won the majority in the house but now they actually have to do something, get specific about what they intend to do and how they intend to do it. 

In the end it's going to be the same republicans in charge that were in charge last time they had power, so don't expect much to change.


----------



## G.T.

And nobody had a filibuster proof Senate. It was only filibuster-proof if every Democrat voted as a partisan. It should be commended when they dissent based on study and beliefs. (basically: integrity)


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are good at stating vague generalitites but I seriously doubt that most of the responses that you get will have any specifics.
> 
> Yeah they won the majority in the house but now they actually have to do something, get specific about what they intend to do and how they intend to do it.
> 
> In the end it's going to be the same republicans in charge that were in charge last time they had power, so don't expect much to change.
Click to expand...


That's where the change makes the difference. Thanks to the Tea Party Effect. Look at all those Governor's Seats changing hands. That's where the real change will come from.


----------



## hipeter924

WillowTree said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I look forward to them fixing things in this nation.   I will not be an obstructionist.   Let them at it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Caleeeeefornication? Same ole shit, different day. and you walk around I bet looking all
Click to expand...

They just fail to understand economic reality, haven't they realized that State Capitalism is superior to the EU cesspool that is collapsing in on itself as we speak. Now the Democrats are on the retreat we can at last breathe easy on the fact that democratic socialism will never take hold in America, and right wing economics will make a well deserved return. Even North Korea would have been better than the system Obama's Democrats planned to create in America.


----------



## drsmith1072

Lonestar_logic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
Click to expand...



And what will you say when none or most of what you say NEEDS to happen doesn't happen?? 

Furthermore, several on the right are against socialism and SS and medicare are socialist programs that many believe either need to be done away with, stripped away to almost nothing or privatized into nonexistence. So how can you honestly claim that "NO ONE" is going to cut them when a large portion of republicans are against such socialist big government programs??


----------



## Sallow

Cuts?

I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.

-Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
-Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
-Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
-Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
-Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
-Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.

Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.

Or Military expenditures cut.


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OMG! Is the sky falling!
> 
> No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?
Click to expand...


We're not talking about my platform.  We're talking about the laughably simplistic "Platform" of the tea party.  They'll say "Cuts Cuts Cuts" but have no clue on where those cuts are.  The "Cuts" to the budget that are available amount to a fly fart in a hurricane, when our deficit _is_ the hurricane.

I'd argue that we will not have a balanced budget any time soon; It's just not in the cards.  If and when we do, some tax increases will be necessary to accomplish them.


----------



## editec

Lonestar_logic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington? it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
Click to expand...

 
What _quid pro quo_ deal do you think the GOP can offer to the Dems that will make them go along with extending the tax cuts for billionaires, Lone?

Serious question.

If politics is the art of compromise (and it has to be given our division in Congress) what compromise do you belive the GOP can offer to the Dems?


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.



Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it. 
Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.


----------



## drsmith1072

The Rabbi said:


> Hmm, let's see.  Obama and Democrats ran in '08 on a bunch of slogans.  They took control of both houses of Congress and the White House by filibuster proof majorities.  Yet Nutwinger never called on them to stand and deliver.  And when they did, the country got in a worse mess than ever.
> Now the GOP has control of the House and he challenges them to start governing like they staged a coup.
> Memo: Dems still control the Senate and Obama is still the president.
> My question is: OK Dems.  You've lost control of the House but still have a big role in government.  What are you going to do to solve all these problems?



WOW really? The dems had the filibuster proof majority if you include the independents for roughly six months, so why pretend that had it when they came in back in 2009?? Furthermore, they did deliver on several things, the situation was horrible when they got there in 2009 and we did get out of the recession, so how did they make it worse?? Got any speciifcs?? I thought not. 

In the end your response is typical of most right wing hacks and that is to demand that the other party do something while you demand NOTHING of your own party despite the FACT that they control one house of congress. Isn't that what you accused rightwinger of doing?? 

The republicans now have control of the house, just saying no, is no longer an option.


----------



## rightwinger

Sallow said:


> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.



Don't forget all the money they save by cutting NPR and NEA


----------



## topspin

recessions come and go
 most aren't accompanied by trillions in party give aways nicknamed stimulus.


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
Click to expand...


Like I said, gutting the entire discretionary budget will save about $610 Billion.  Your suggestions, if executed with perfect precision, will save maybe $75 billion.  The deficit is $1.3 Trillion.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG! Is the sky falling!
> 
> No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're not talking about my platform.  We're talking about the laughably simplistic "Platform" of the tea party.  They'll say "Cuts Cuts Cuts" but have no clue on where those cuts are.  The "Cuts" to the budget that are available amount to a fly fart in a hurricane, when our deficit _is_ the hurricane.
> 
> I'd argue that we will not have a balanced budget any time soon; It's just not in the cards.  If and when we do, some tax increases will be necessary to accomplish them.
Click to expand...


We the People are what Platforms are supposed to be about. I know it's been a long time since We mattered at all, but it is something You need to get used to. When you want something of value, try to have something of value to give in return. As alien as the concept seems to you, it actually works very effectively. There is nothing You can do for Anyone Else with not having first acquired it on your own, be it by Theft, Mandate, or your Own Resources, Someone somewhere paid the price.


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> OMG! Is the sky falling!
> 
> No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We're not talking about my platform.  We're talking about the laughably simplistic "Platform" of the tea party.  They'll say "Cuts Cuts Cuts" but have no clue on where those cuts are.  The "Cuts" to the budget that are available amount to a fly fart in a hurricane, when our deficit _is_ the hurricane.
> 
> I'd argue that we will not have a balanced budget any time soon; It's just not in the cards.  If and when we do, some tax increases will be necessary to accomplish them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We the People are what Platforms are supposed to be about. I know it's been a long time since We mattered at all, but it is something You need to get used to. When you want something of value, try to have something of value to give in return. As alien as the concept seems to you, it actually works very effectively. There is nothing You can do for Anyone Else with not having first acquired it on your own, be it by Theft, Mandate, or your Own Resources, Someone somewhere paid the price.
Click to expand...


Note I've not cheerleaded for anyone; so I don't know who you think "I" am in reference to the "We" you speak of.

My simple math holds out, your "We the People" rant notwithstanding.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like I said, gutting the entire discretionary budget will save about $610 Billion.  Your suggestions, if executed with perfect precision, will save maybe $75 billion.  The deficit is $1.3 Trillion.
Click to expand...


There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.

Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
Click to expand...


Again. If you don't cut anything..nothing gets "saved". What you listed might "feel" good but saves very little money in the big picture.

High ticket items are SSI, Medicare, and Military. If you don't cut any of those..or find new revenue..and I mean big revenue..you aren't doing anything about the deficit.


----------



## hipeter924

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> OMG! Is the sky falling!
> 
> No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We're not talking about my platform.  We're talking about the laughably simplistic "Platform" of the tea party.  They'll say "Cuts Cuts Cuts" but have no clue on where those cuts are.  The "Cuts" to the budget that are available amount to a fly fart in a hurricane, when our deficit _is_ the hurricane.
> 
> I'd argue that we will not have a balanced budget any time soon; It's just not in the cards.  If and when we do, some tax increases will be necessary to accomplish them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We the People are what Platforms are supposed to be about. I know it's been a long time since We mattered at all, but it is something You need to get used to. When you want something of value, try to have something of value to give in return. As alien as the concept seems to you, it actually works very effectively. There is nothing You can do for Anyone Else with not having first acquired it on your own, be it by Theft, Mandate, or your Own Resources, Someone somewhere paid the price.
Click to expand...

It's why they hate the libertarian concept of rights so much, they don't want to give a chance to a system where people give money out of their own hearts rather than have their money forcibly re-distributed by the government, nor do they want a system where stealing 13+ trillion dollars from the average American and giving it to their corporate and union sponsors is illegal.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OMG! Is the sky falling!
> 
> No... I guess not. Wow, we made a few wrong turns. What ever you do, don't do anything to fix it? Is that your platform?
Click to expand...


uh actually he asked a valid question and you gave no real answer. Furthermore, according to many on the right, and some in this very thread, doing nothing is a good thing. LOL


----------



## Two Thumbs

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Not a whole lot you can do from just the House.  As was thought, the GOP got the House, and made gains in the Senate.  You still have 51or more seats in the Senate.  So the best you can hope for is gridlock.

I don't expect the gop to magically become conservative over night.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are good at stating vague generalitites but I seriously doubt that most of the responses that you get will have any specifics.
> 
> Yeah they won the majority in the house but now they actually have to do something, get specific about what they intend to do and how they intend to do it.
> 
> In the end it's going to be the same republicans in charge that were in charge last time they had power, so don't expect much to change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's where the change makes the difference. Thanks to the Tea Party Effect. Look at all those Governor's Seats changing hands. That's where the real change will come from.
Click to expand...


So in other words, you still have NO specifics. Got it. 

Thanks for proving my point. LOL


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, gutting the entire discretionary budget will save about $610 Billion.  Your suggestions, if executed with perfect precision, will save maybe $75 billion.  The deficit is $1.3 Trillion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.
> 
> Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.
Click to expand...


That ain't true! Taxes are as low as they've every been.  Where do you get this stuff?


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
Click to expand...


Do you have ANY specifics to offer?? 
"their jurisdiction?" What specifically does this refer to?
"adjust to reason?" What spcifics do you offer to show that said salaries and compesnation are UNreasonable? 
"fraud and gouging?" What fraud and gouging are you referring to?
"rooted out incompetence and redundancy?" Like what??


----------



## DiamondDave

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans.



Hope.. Change

'nuff said


----------



## drsmith1072

topspin said:


> recessions come and go
> most aren't accompanied by trillions in party give aways nicknamed stimulus.



Funny but republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. lol


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Cuyo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
Click to expand...


I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, gutting the entire discretionary budget will save about $610 Billion.  Your suggestions, if executed with perfect precision, will save maybe $75 billion.  The deficit is $1.3 Trillion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.
> 
> Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That ain't true! Taxes are as low as they've every been.  Where do you get this stuff?
Click to expand...


News Flash, Your Taxes are hidden in Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges. The Government usually profits from every side of the equation when money changes hands. They benefit even when you die, like they were your silent partner your whole live. WTFU. This is about Power, Absolute Power and control over every aspect of your life, cradle to grave.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

drsmith1072 said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And what will you say when none or most of what you say NEEDS to happen doesn't happen??
> 
> Furthermore, several on the right are against socialism and SS and medicare are socialist programs that many believe either need to be done away with, stripped away to almost nothing or privatized into nonexistence. So how can you honestly claim that "NO ONE" is going to cut them when a large portion of republicans are against such socialist big government programs??
Click to expand...


It will happen. 

Let's see a Republican concensus that they want to cut SS and/or medicare. It should be easy since you claim a large portion of them do.


----------



## Intense

Lonestar_logic said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
Click to expand...


Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or Government Agencies limit what they do to their Jurisdiction.
> Or Government Salaries and Compensation adjust to Reason.
> Or Government took the Fraud and Gouging out of Higher Education, rather than making lame excuses for it.
> Or if Government Rooted Out Incompetence and Redundancy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, gutting the entire discretionary budget will save about $610 Billion.  Your suggestions, if executed with perfect precision, will save maybe $75 billion.  The deficit is $1.3 Trillion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.
> 
> Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.
Click to expand...


This coming from the poster who parrots right wing talking points after swallowing them swill hook, line, and sinker. LOL 

Lot's of things go up in spite of the economy one of those is insurance premiums which have gone steadily up for yours and years but that didn't stop right wing hacks from trying to blame the recent increase on the healthcare bill now did it?? 

Face it, he called out your spin that won't do nearly enough and the best thing you have to offer is an atetmpt to spin it and blame "the progressive scheme" as you try to change and avoid the original subject.


----------



## Cuyo

Lonestar_logic said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
Click to expand...


The HC bill does not provide taxpayer funded insurance.  It is responsible for 0.0% of the current deficit.  If your argument is that it will result in deficit in the future, speculate away.  But so far you have not addressed the current deficit, not one bit.

Any other suggestions?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

editec said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington? it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What _quid pro quo_ deal do you think the GOP can offer to the Dems that will make them go along with extending the tax cuts for billionaires, Lone?
> 
> Serious question.
> 
> If politics is the art of compromise (and it has to be given our division in Congress) what compromise do you belive the GOP can offer to the Dems?
Click to expand...


The Dems want to keep their jobs in 2012. That's good incentive is you ask me. 

No compromise, the house has Obama and the Senate over a barrel. Congress holds the purse strings.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Intense said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.
Click to expand...


And always have been.


----------



## topspin

drsmith1072 said:


> topspin said:
> 
> 
> 
> recessions come and go
> most aren't accompanied by trillions in party give aways nicknamed stimulus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny but republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. lol
Click to expand...


 what's funny is the tears in your cheereos


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.
> 
> Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That ain't true! Taxes are as low as they've every been.  Where do you get this stuff?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> News Flash, Your Taxes are hidden in Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges. The Government usually profits from every side of the equation when money changes hands. They benefit even when you die, like they were your silent partner your whole live. WTFU. This is about Power, Absolute Power and control over every aspect of your life, cradle to grave.
Click to expand...


Are you talking federal or state?? you do know that there is a difference between the two don't you?? BTW got any specifics or are you just running on your usual vague generalities??


----------



## Claudette

Lets just wait and see what they do. Shall we??


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Cuyo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The HC bill does not provide taxpayer funded insurance.  It is responsible for 0.0% of the current deficit.  If your argument is that it will result in deficit in the future, speculate away.  But so far you have not addressed the current deficit, not one bit.
> 
> Any other suggestions?
Click to expand...


I didn't bring up the "uninsured" you did.  

Get your head out of your ass and pay attention!

According to the CBO. Obamacare will add 109 Billion to the deficit over ten years.

So defunding Obamacare and then repealing it, we will avoid adding 109 billion to the deficit. You people are stupid.

Lucky for me I got work to do.  

Adios!


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> That ain't true! Taxes are as low as they've every been.  Where do you get this stuff?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Flash, Your Taxes are hidden in Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges. The Government usually profits from every side of the equation when money changes hands. They benefit even when you die, like they were your silent partner your whole live. WTFU. This is about Power, Absolute Power and control over every aspect of your life, cradle to grave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you talking federal or state?? you do know that there is a difference between the two don't you?? BTW got any specifics or are you just running on your usual vague generalities??
Click to expand...


Both, but you already know that. Face it, you just don't get it. You never will. It will never be enough for you.


----------



## The Rabbi

G.T. said:


> And nobody had a filibuster proof Senate. It was only filibuster-proof if every Democrat voted as a partisan. It should be commended when they dissent based on study and beliefs. (basically: integrity)



Right.  And the GOP doesn't control the House.  It only controls the House if every Republican votes along party lines.
WHere do people learn this stuff?????


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are hidden expenditures all over the place. I don't buy the cooked books for a second. They feed you the Shell Game or Three Card Monty, and you buy it, Hook, Line, and Sinker.
> 
> Have you noticed at all that no matter what happens to the economy, Government Salaries, Service Fee's, Taxes, and Surcharges still rise? Government has not only become a Parasite, it has out grown the Host. You just keep blaming the host. It fit's real well into the Progressive Scheme, which is to bleed us dry, take what it did not earn, and seek other grounds to feed off of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That ain't true! Taxes are as low as they've every been.  Where do you get this stuff?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> News Flash, Your Taxes are hidden in Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges. The Government usually profits from every side of the equation when money changes hands. They benefit even when you die, like they were your silent partner your whole live. WTFU. This is about Power, Absolute Power and control over every aspect of your life, cradle to grave.
Click to expand...


What can I say?  You talk about "The Government" like it's an entity of it's own.  We are the government.  Sure, there are _individuals_ who unjustly enrich themselves through government service and fraud, but I got news for you- They do that in the private sector too.  In the private sector, they don't even need to hide it, it's merely called "Profits."  But they do all the same waste and abuse, probably worse than the government, because they don't have the same accountability instruments.  The sad part is, in private industry, hiding fraudulent profits have a much more sinister motive; They can make their profits right out in the open.  They only hide them to avoid paying their share for the commons on which they are dependent.  

I'm sorry, if you have such a sinister view of the government, that it's some three-headed ogre out to getcha, there's not much I can do to change your mind... Such views have far too much emotional investment.

But regarding the deficit; My simple math still holds true.  You can't just trim a little here and trim a little there and have the result of a balanced budget.  The deficit is far to astoundingly high.


----------



## drsmith1072

Lonestar_logic said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what will you say when none or most of what you say NEEDS to happen doesn't happen??
> 
> Furthermore, several on the right are against socialism and SS and medicare are socialist programs that many believe either need to be done away with, stripped away to almost nothing or privatized into nonexistence. So how can you honestly claim that "NO ONE" is going to cut them when a large portion of republicans are against such socialist big government programs??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It will happen.
> 
> Let's see a Republican concensus that they want to cut SS and/or medicare. It should be easy since you claim a large portion of them do.
Click to expand...


LOL Thanks for the baseless and sunbstanceless prediction nostradumbass but I did ask a question however, I see that you avoided it. Imagine that. 

Furthermore, it is a simple conclusion to make when the tea party movement was all about antisocialism which spread throughout the party, especially when you consider that the SS and medicare are socialist programs. How can you be both for and against socialism??


----------



## Cuyo

Lonestar_logic said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The HC bill does not provide taxpayer funded insurance.  It is responsible for 0.0% of the current deficit.  If your argument is that it will result in deficit in the future, speculate away.  But so far you have not addressed the current deficit, not one bit.
> 
> Any other suggestions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I didn't bring up the "uninsured" you did.
> 
> Get your head out of your ass and pay attention!
> 
> According to the CBO. Obamacare will add 109 Billion to the deficit over ten years.
> 
> So defunding Obamacare and then repealing it, we will avoid adding 109 billion to the deficit. You people are stupid.
> 
> Lucky for me I got work to do.
> 
> Adios!
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, but where the hell exactly did I bring up the uninsured?

Edit: OHHH I see... No that original post should have read "Unemployed," not "Uninsured."


----------



## drsmith1072

topspin said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> topspin said:
> 
> 
> 
> recessions come and go
> most aren't accompanied by trillions in party give aways nicknamed stimulus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny but republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what's funny is the tears in your cheereos
Click to expand...


Actually I ate raisin bran for breakfast but no tears here. I see the republicans winning the house as a good thing. Now that actually have to DO something other than just say no.  

Furthermore, it's funny how you didn't address the fact that many republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. LOL <sarcasm> I wonder why? LOL


----------



## midcan5

It will be interesting to see if the republicans now cut Medicare and the military machine, both are the largest expenditures, and places where their words would mean something. SS is solvent for a long time. Reduced taxes did nothing good under Reagan or Bush Jr. Medicare change would cost the republicans the 2012 election, so what will really change?  The military war machine plays on fear and it also benefits all their benefactors so ultimately it will be education, children and the infrastructure that suffer - same as always. Nothing changes sometimes. 


"Capitalism leads to dole queues, the scramble for markets, and war. Collectivism leads to concentration camps, leader-worship and war. There is no way out of this unless a planned economy can be somehow combined with freedom of the intellect, which can only happen if the concept of right and wrong can be restored." George Orwell


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> News Flash, Your Taxes are hidden in Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges. The Government usually profits from every side of the equation when money changes hands. They benefit even when you die, like they were your silent partner your whole live. WTFU. This is about Power, Absolute Power and control over every aspect of your life, cradle to grave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking federal or state?? you do know that there is a difference between the two don't you?? BTW got any specifics or are you just running on your usual vague generalities??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Both, but you already know that. Face it, you just don't get it. You never will. It will never be enough for you.
Click to expand...


So you are blaming the federal government for increases made at the state level?? Are you really this dishonest?? After all the topic was the federal government and now you are dishonestly trying to lump "Surcharges, Fee's Penalties, and Undisclosed Hidden Charges" from the states into the discussion about the fed. 

So why are you so dishonest? 

BTW still waiting on the specifics for your previous posts, IF you have any that is. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath. LOL


----------



## Sallow

hipeter924 said:


> It's why they hate the libertarian concept of rights so much, they don't want to give a chance to a system where people give money out of their own hearts rather than have their money forcibly re-distributed by the government, nor do they want a system where stealing 13+ trillion dollars from the average American and giving it to their corporate and union sponsors is illegal.



First off..this whole notion of "redistribution" of wealth only seems to upset the right when it's done from the wealthy to the middle class and poor. The other way is no problem. And that is essentially what the Bush administration was doing and the Reagan administration did..with some pretty crappy results. It's also done in third world countries.

And I love this notion of complaining about taxes. You know who doesn't pay taxes? Marxists. Yep..no taxes. Next comes up...some of the Monarchies and Autocracies. Some of them have taxes..some don't. But they all have very craptacular economies. So this notion of "low taxation" someone equates to great economic booms is nuts. Taxes are what you pay to live in a great country. Me? I am proud to pay my taxes. It means I am contributing to the American way. Truth, Justice and Liberty for all. That ain't cheap.


----------



## G.T.

The Rabbi said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> 
> And nobody had a filibuster proof Senate. It was only filibuster-proof if every Democrat voted as a partisan. It should be commended when they dissent based on study and beliefs. (basically: integrity)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right.  And the GOP doesn't control the House.  It only controls the House if every Republican votes along party lines.
> WHere do people learn this stuff?????
Click to expand...


Except the part regarding the house isn't true, you knew that. 

Tell me, how many votes makes an item "fillibuster proof," and how many D's were in the Senate. Take your time.


----------



## kiwiman127

Lonestar_logic said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
Click to expand...

===================
"The uninsured can stay uninsured" and YOU will pay for the uninsured' health care via higher insurance premiums like you have been doing over the past years, either way YOU pay for it. The more uninsured, the more your insurance premium rates go up. That's not exactly a win-win but more so a lose-lose situation.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.
Click to expand...


Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.


----------



## Bill Angel

drsmith1072 said:


> topspin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny but republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what's funny is the tears in your cheereos
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually I ate raisin bran for breakfast but no tears here. I see the republicans winning the house as a good thing. Now that actually have to DO something other than just say no.
> 
> Furthermore, it's funny how you didn't address the fact that many republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. LOL <sarcasm> I wonder why? LOL
Click to expand...


One proposal that is repeatedly discussed is the elimination of agricultural subsidies and price supports. One program that Tea Party Republicans should support is the elimination of  "direct payments," which is a $5 billion a year subsidy that pays landowners a set per-acre amount regardless of what they're currently growing or whether prices are high or low.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already told your goofy ass. The uninsured can just stay uninsured. Health insurance isn't a right Nancy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
Click to expand...


Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
Click to expand...


Oh and look at the typical bait and switch by the right winger. LOL He can't debate the fact that emergency room services available to the uninsured is more expensive than having someone covered by insurance going to the emergency room, so he tries to change the subject. LOL

How typical.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, Emergency Room Services are available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
Click to expand...




Oh gosh..that's just funny.

Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.

And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.


----------



## Sallow

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh and look at the typical bait and switch by the right winger. LOL He can't debate the fact that emergency room services available to the uninsured is more expensive than having someone covered by insurance going to the emergency room, so he tries to change the subject. LOL
> 
> How typical.
Click to expand...


Typical and typically wrong. Illegals do pay taxes..they have to. And they pay into SSI. Most wind up going back in a few years anyway..once they make a large amount of cash.

And if they get sick..they look for "friendly" physicians, one that will cater to this community. It's sort of a black market underground thing.

On the whole..they contribute to programs they will never use, perform work no one else will do..and cheaper.

No wonder big business wants them "illegal".


----------



## Sallow

Bill Angel said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> topspin said:
> 
> 
> 
> what's funny is the tears in your cheereos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I ate raisin bran for breakfast but no tears here. I see the republicans winning the house as a good thing. Now that actually have to DO something other than just say no.
> 
> Furthermore, it's funny how you didn't address the fact that many republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. LOL <sarcasm> I wonder why? LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One proposal that is repeatedly discussed is the elimination of agricultural subsidies and price supports. One program that Tea Party Republicans should support is the elimination of  "direct payments," which is a $5 billion a year subsidy that pays landowners a set per-acre amount regardless of what they're currently growing or whether prices are high or low.
Click to expand...


I seriously hope they propose doing that.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Wait a sec. They're illegal, but they have vaild SocSec #'s? And they get electronic paychecks that take out SocSec and taxes?

Are you sure about that?


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh and look at the typical bait and switch by the right winger. LOL He can't debate the fact that emergency room services available to the uninsured is more expensive than having someone covered by insurance going to the emergency room, so he tries to change the subject. LOL
> 
> How typical.
Click to expand...


What I'm tired of debating is the proverbial  $100.00 band-aid and why everyone should have one, or ten, or a hundred. My question, plain and simple is why should the proverbial band-aid cost $100.00 in the first place? Why should Health Care or Education cost so much. There are many excuses, few reasons. In Health Care, Law Suits are a factor, Illegal Immigration is a factor, Government interference is also a factor. These are not bait and switch tactics, they are examples of an unjust formula. Nice try though. Maybe we just need more free clinics for you to donate to.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Bill Angel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I ate raisin bran for breakfast but no tears here. I see the republicans winning the house as a good thing. Now that actually have to DO something other than just say no.
> 
> Furthermore, it's funny how you didn't address the fact that many republicans didn't seem to mind the stimulus money when they tried to take credit for what it had done. LOL <sarcasm> I wonder why? LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One proposal that is repeatedly discussed is the elimination of agricultural subsidies and price supports. One program that Tea Party Republicans should support is the elimination of  "direct payments," which is a $5 billion a year subsidy that pays landowners a set per-acre amount regardless of what they're currently growing or whether prices are high or low.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I seriously hope they propose doing that.
Click to expand...


Why do we subsidize tobacco farmers?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Shhhh.  Here's the secret formula.

We'll campaign for spending cuts, Reid and Obama will move further Left, Dems lose another 75 seats and the Presidency in 2012


----------



## drsmith1072

CrusaderFrank said:


> Wait a sec. They're illegal, but they have vaild SocSec #'s? And they get electronic paychecks that take out SocSec and taxes?
> 
> Are you sure about that?



Uh if they are hired to do an on the books job and SS and taxes are taken out then the money still goes into the system but they will never benefit from it because they do not have valid SS#s. It's really pretty simple to understand.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

drsmith1072 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wait a sec. They're illegal, but they have vaild SocSec #'s? And they get electronic paychecks that take out SocSec and taxes?
> 
> Are you sure about that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh if they are hired to do an on the books job and SS and taxes are taken out then the money still goes into the system but they will never benefit from it because they do not have valid SS#s. It's really pretty simple to understand.
Click to expand...


They're here illegally and you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.

Wow!

Are you still waiting for that Nigeria Diamond Mine to pay off?


----------



## G.T.

Frank, why don't you actually go do some fucking research for fuck's sake, and find out for yourself if they pay in. It would make you look a lot less of an ass-hole, because you're ridiculing people for knowing that answer, while you obviously don't, and that's dick.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which are much more expensive..over the long run..then having someone covered by insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
Click to expand...


I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.


----------



## G.T.

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
Click to expand...


You live in the melting pot mecca of the United States, and at the same time think that you know the immigration status of those you see? Tell me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Full-Auto

And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.


Yes the catch and release program has been so helpful.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
Click to expand...


Sure I do. You talking about Elmhurst General? My father died there.

I am well acquainted with the place.


----------



## Cuyo

CrusaderFrank said:


> Wait a sec. They're illegal, but they have vaild SocSec #'s? And they get electronic paychecks that take out SocSec and taxes?
> 
> Are you sure about that?



Yes.  Illegals can apply for a taxpayer ID number for paying taxes, but can receive no benefits.  I've seen it done; Or they just pay in under a fake number, and still can receive no benefits.  In fact, I've never seen it done by any other means.


----------



## Sallow

G.T. said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You live in the melting pot mecca of the United States, and at the same time think that you know the immigration status of those you see? Tell me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...



Pretty funny..since I use to live in Grandview Towers..in um..Elmhurst when I was a kid.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Angel said:
> 
> 
> 
> One proposal that is repeatedly discussed is the elimination of agricultural subsidies and price supports. One program that Tea Party Republicans should support is the elimination of  "direct payments," which is a $5 billion a year subsidy that pays landowners a set per-acre amount regardless of what they're currently growing or whether prices are high or low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously hope they propose doing that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do we subsidize tobacco farmers?
Click to expand...


Again..try it.

John Boehner is a big shill for big tobacco.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and look at the typical bait and switch by the right winger. LOL He can't debate the fact that emergency room services available to the uninsured is more expensive than having someone covered by insurance going to the emergency room, so he tries to change the subject. LOL
> 
> How typical.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What I'm tired of debating is the proverbial  $100.00 band-aid and why everyone should have one, or ten, or a hundred. My question, plain and simple is why should the proverbial band-aid cost $100.00 in the first place? Why should Health Care or Education cost so much. There are many excuses, few reasons. In Health Care, Law Suits are a factor, Illegal Immigration is a factor, Government interference is also a factor. These are not bait and switch tactics, they are examples of an unjust formula. Nice try though. Maybe we just need more free clinics for you to donate to.
Click to expand...


If you are tired of it then don't waste other poster's time by responding when you don;lt actually want to debate what is being discussed. LOL
As for why the costs you only have to look at what you righties allegedly believe and that is the free market. 
BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other

Furthermore, it is a bait and switch because he was talking about the comparison of uninsired care to insured care in the emergency room and instead of addressing that you went on a rant about illegals. 

You know, I find it funny that you only respond to posts that you think you can spin as you avoid the majority of the questions asked of you. LOL


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and look at the typical bait and switch by the right winger. LOL He can't debate the fact that emergency room services available to the uninsured is more expensive than having someone covered by insurance going to the emergency room, so he tries to change the subject. LOL
> 
> How typical.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm tired of debating is the proverbial  $100.00 band-aid and why everyone should have one, or ten, or a hundred. My question, plain and simple is why should the proverbial band-aid cost $100.00 in the first place? Why should Health Care or Education cost so much. There are many excuses, few reasons. In Health Care, Law Suits are a factor, Illegal Immigration is a factor, Government interference is also a factor. These are not bait and switch tactics, they are examples of an unjust formula. Nice try though. Maybe we just need more free clinics for you to donate to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are tired of it then don't waste other poster's time by responding when you don;lt actually want to debate what is being discussed. LOL
> As for why the costs you only have to look at what you righties allegedly believe and that is the free market.
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other
> 
> Furthermore, it is a bait and switch because he was talking about the comparison of uninsired care to insured care in the emergency room and instead of addressing that you went on a rant about illegals.
> 
> You know, I find it funny that you only respond to posts that you think you can spin as you avoid the majority of the questions asked of you. LOL
Click to expand...


Reason is beyond you Smith. The only waste of time is your flawed argument. Government has a primary role, and government has a role that it usurped. You don't know the difference between the two, you do not understand the limit of power or jurisdiction, that is why the cost, which is such a small part of the tyranny, is so great. 

Cost of service has a direct relationship to overhead, unpaid services have a direct relationship to overhead. Federal Mandate has a direct relation to overhead. Illegal;s getting services they don't pay for, has a direct relation to overhead. I guess that makes you a lier and a thief, with a piss poor attitude. I'm not your puppet on a string, here to answer your questions. Answer your own questions.


----------



## drsmith1072

CrusaderFrank said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wait a sec. They're illegal, but they have vaild SocSec #'s? And they get electronic paychecks that take out SocSec and taxes?
> 
> Are you sure about that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh if they are hired to do an on the books job and SS and taxes are taken out then the money still goes into the system but they will never benefit from it because they do not have valid SS#s. It's really pretty simple to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They're here illegally and you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.
> 
> Wow!
> 
> Are you still waiting for that Nigeria Diamond Mine to pay off?
Click to expand...


Are you retarded or just a lying sack of shite?? I NEVER said that they had valid SS#s so why LIE and claim that i did?? 

Even with an INvalid SS# if they get a job that is on the books, they will have taxes withdrawn from their pay that will go into the system that they will NEVER benefit from.

I thought I stated that quite clearly previously, so why did you feel the need to be dishonest as you inserted an opinion that was not mine and try to claim that it was??


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Congressional priorities, none of which will pass the Senate or Obama.

1. Cut Spending , Target Depression Era Programs and Departments for elimination

2. Close the southern border

3. Audit the Federal Reserve We'd like to know who they gave our money to

4. Repeal ObamaCare, pass Whole Foods Health Care

5. Reform Fannie and Freddie so they have no role in single family home mortgages ever again. Out their SFH portfolio up for sale a la RTC.

6. Don't appropriate any funds for any of the Czars.

7.

8.

9.

10.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure I do. You talking about Elmhurst General? My father died there.
> 
> I am well acquainted with the place.
Click to expand...


If you were around the neighborhood at all you would know that there are hundreds standing on the streets every day waiting for work. You would know that Illegals are not deported here, you would know that the ER is routinely at full capacity. A fairer solution here would be free clinics.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

drsmith1072 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh if they are hired to do an on the books job and SS and taxes are taken out then the money still goes into the system but they will never benefit from it because they do not have valid SS#s. It's really pretty simple to understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're here illegally and you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.
> 
> Wow!
> 
> Are you still waiting for that Nigeria Diamond Mine to pay off?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you retarded or just a lying sack of shite?? I NEVER said that they had valid SS#s so why LIE and claim that i did??
> 
> Even with an INvalid SS# if they get a job that is on the books, they will have taxes withdrawn from their pay that will go into the system that they will NEVER benefit from.
> 
> I thought I stated that quite clearly previously, so why did you feel the need to be dishonest as you inserted an opinion that was not mine and try to claim that it was??
Click to expand...


How does someone get hired by providing an invalid Soc Sec #?  I'm at a loss here and I'm not kidding.

Why hires people that give fake SocSec numbers?  I can understand why Juan Illegal would give a fake number to collect the rest of the check, but what kind of employer hires people without doing any background or credit check. Do they work for the FBI? Homeland Security? Timmy Geithner?


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. What is more expensive in the long run is open border policy. You are just in denial. The market price will bend to what people can afford or stay in inventory. Same with services.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
Click to expand...


LOL so because you live close to a hospital that makes you an expert on who goes into it?? Isn't that a lot like palin having foriegn policy experience because she can see russia from her house?? LOL 

BTW since the topic is NOW illegals and their use of emergency rooms can you prove your implication that the one that you "live near" is packed with illegals?? 

Face it, once again you've got NOTHING and changing the subject didn't help. lol


----------



## Intense

G.T. said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You live in the melting pot mecca of the United States, and at the same time think that you know the immigration status of those you see? Tell me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


You are wrong.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure I do. You talking about Elmhurst General? My father died there.
> 
> I am well acquainted with the place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you were around the neighborhood at all you would know that there are hundreds standing on the streets every day waiting for work. You would know that Illegals are not deported here, you would know that the ER is routinely at full capacity. A fairer solution here would be free clinics.
Click to expand...


Are you talking about day workers? You know they are illegal, how? Many of them are from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is part of the United States..and they have a legal right to live anywhere within it's borders they wish too. Many others are legal immigrants. You know where I use to find lots of illegal immigrants? Working for Irish bars. But the economy got better in Ireland and some went back.

You know where you might find lots of illegals? In Flushing and Chinatown (Maybe little Japan in the East Village)..and they do exactly what I was talking about. They have a sort of black market for their illegals. They have medical services which are off the radar along with other things. However..it's pretty tough to be an illegal in NYC. Shops are frequently checked. It's one of the reasons the garment industry left.


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gosh..that's just funny.
> 
> Yep, illegal immigrants are just racing to get services so they can get discovered and deported.
> 
> And again..President Obama's administration has been deporting illegals faster then President Bush's administration did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL so because you live close to a hospital that makes you an expert on who goes into it?? Isn't that a lot like palin having foriegn policy experience because she can see russia from her house?? LOL
> 
> BTW since the topic is NOW illegals and their use of emergency rooms can you prove your implication that the one that you "live near" is packed with illegals??
> 
> Face it, once again you've got NOTHING and changing the subject didn't help. lol
Click to expand...


You have no clue as to the Chaos your Bullshit helps create Sparky. That's typical though. Just keep compounding the damage, the harm, and tell the rest of us that it's too complicated for us to change. Your Shit runnith over. Clean yourself up.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure I do. You talking about Elmhurst General? My father died there.
> 
> I am well acquainted with the place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you were around the neighborhood at all you would know that there are hundreds standing on the streets every day waiting for work. You would know that Illegals are not deported here, you would know that the ER is routinely at full capacity. A fairer solution here would be free clinics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you talking about day workers? You know they are illegal, how? Many of them are from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is part of the United States..and they have a legal right to live anywhere within it's borders they wish too. Many others are legal immigrants. You know where I use to find lots of illegal immigrants? Working for Irish bars. But the economy got better in Ireland and some went back.
> 
> You know where you might find lots of illegals? In Flushing and Chinatown (Maybe little Japan in the East Village)..and they do exactly what I was talking about. They have a sort of black market for their illegals. They have medical services which are off the radar along with other things. However..it's pretty tough to be an illegal in NYC. Shops are frequently checked. It's one of the reasons the garment industry left.
Click to expand...


You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.


----------



## Big Fitz

California Girl said:


> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.


No no... it's "Oh no you di'int!" to listen to some of my co-workers.

I think it's become "Oh shit! we did!"


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm tired of debating is the proverbial  $100.00 band-aid and why everyone should have one, or ten, or a hundred. My question, plain and simple is why should the proverbial band-aid cost $100.00 in the first place? Why should Health Care or Education cost so much. There are many excuses, few reasons. In Health Care, Law Suits are a factor, Illegal Immigration is a factor, Government interference is also a factor. These are not bait and switch tactics, they are examples of an unjust formula. Nice try though. Maybe we just need more free clinics for you to donate to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are tired of it then don't waste other poster's time by responding when you don;lt actually want to debate what is being discussed. LOL
> As for why the costs you only have to look at what you righties allegedly believe and that is the free market.
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other
> 
> Furthermore, it is a bait and switch because he was talking about the comparison of uninsired care to insured care in the emergency room and instead of addressing that you went on a rant about illegals.
> 
> You know, I find it funny that you only respond to posts that you think you can spin as you avoid the majority of the questions asked of you. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reason is beyond you Smith. The only waste of time is your flawed argument. Government has a primary role, and government has a role that it usurped. You don't know the difference between the two, you do not understand the limit of power or jurisdiction, that is why the cost, which is such a small part of the tyranny, is so great.
> 
> Cost of service has a direct relationship to overhead, unpaid services have a direct relationship to overhead. Federal Mandate has a direct relation to overhead. Illegal;s getting services they don't pay for, has a direct relation to overhead. I guess that makes you a lier and a thief, with a piss poor attitude. I'm not your puppet on a string, here to answer your questions. Answer your own questions.
Click to expand...


If "reason" is beyond anyone here it is YOU. You constantly try to change the subject to avoid debates that you refuse to admit that you can't win. 
You refuse to provide specifics when asked because you know you have none but refuse to admit that you are WRONG and have nothing REAL to add. Now you come at me with the BS offtopic spin about your perception of how the government has "usurped" a role that is not it's own to have even as you claim I don't see what you claim is real but can't substantiate when asked. LOL   

Furthermore, how is asking you questions about your baseless, still unsubstantiated and still contradictory claims consider lying or thievery?? Oh wait that is just your usual attack response when you have nothing REAL to add. Got it. Not once did i claim that those things did not contribute to the cost however, in the end the industry itself decides what to charge based on their own profit margins. 

Do you literally want me to answer my questions about your opinions?? Seems like you are asking me to put words in your mouth. LOL 

BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other? Why so contradictory?


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you were around the neighborhood at all you would know that there are hundreds standing on the streets every day waiting for work. You would know that Illegals are not deported here, you would know that the ER is routinely at full capacity. A fairer solution here would be free clinics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about day workers? You know they are illegal, how? Many of them are from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is part of the United States..and they have a legal right to live anywhere within it's borders they wish too. Many others are legal immigrants. You know where I use to find lots of illegal immigrants? Working for Irish bars. But the economy got better in Ireland and some went back.
> 
> You know where you might find lots of illegals? In Flushing and Chinatown (Maybe little Japan in the East Village)..and they do exactly what I was talking about. They have a sort of black market for their illegals. They have medical services which are off the radar along with other things. However..it's pretty tough to be an illegal in NYC. Shops are frequently checked. It's one of the reasons the garment industry left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
Click to expand...


There isn't an excuse in the post. You wanted to change the direction of the thread. And I've pretty much gone and explained what I know from personal experience. It might be you that doesn't know what they are talking about..

Now..answer the question. You know these people are "illegal", how?


----------



## drsmith1072

CrusaderFrank said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> They're here illegally and you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.
> 
> Wow!
> 
> Are you still waiting for that Nigeria Diamond Mine to pay off?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you retarded or just a lying sack of shite?? I NEVER said that they had valid SS#s so why LIE and claim that i did??
> 
> Even with an INvalid SS# if they get a job that is on the books, they will have taxes withdrawn from their pay that will go into the system that they will NEVER benefit from.
> 
> I thought I stated that quite clearly previously, so why did you feel the need to be dishonest as you inserted an opinion that was not mine and try to claim that it was??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How does someone get hired by providing an invalid Soc Sec #?  I'm at a loss here and I'm not kidding.
> 
> Why hires people that give fake SocSec numbers?  I can understand why Juan Illegal would give a fake number to collect the rest of the check, but what kind of employer hires people without doing any background or credit check. Do they work for the FBI? Homeland Security? Timmy Geithner?
Click to expand...


Talk to meg whitman, R from califonia, who hired a housekeeper with an invalid SS# and did nothing when she was notified that it was invalid. 
I just think it's ridiculous that you would try to pretend it doesn't happen. LOL

BTW nothing that you said changes the FACT that you lied and tried to put words into my mouth.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

drsmith1072 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you retarded or just a lying sack of shite?? I NEVER said that they had valid SS#s so why LIE and claim that i did??
> 
> Even with an INvalid SS# if they get a job that is on the books, they will have taxes withdrawn from their pay that will go into the system that they will NEVER benefit from.
> 
> I thought I stated that quite clearly previously, so why did you feel the need to be dishonest as you inserted an opinion that was not mine and try to claim that it was??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does someone get hired by providing an invalid Soc Sec #?  I'm at a loss here and I'm not kidding.
> 
> Why hires people that give fake SocSec numbers?  I can understand why Juan Illegal would give a fake number to collect the rest of the check, but what kind of employer hires people without doing any background or credit check. Do they work for the FBI? Homeland Security? Timmy Geithner?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Talk to meg whitman, R from califonia, who hired a housekeeper with an invalid SS# and did nothing when she was notified that it was invalid.
> I just think it's ridiculous that you would try to pretend it doesn't happen. LOL
> 
> BTW nothing that you said changes the FACT that you lied and tried to put words into my mouth.
Click to expand...


I didn't lie you fucking retard. I didn't know this was a big problem or a problem at all. It's just the most absurd thing i can imagine


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about day workers? You know they are illegal, how? Many of them are from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is part of the United States..and they have a legal right to live anywhere within it's borders they wish too. Many others are legal immigrants. You know where I use to find lots of illegal immigrants? Working for Irish bars. But the economy got better in Ireland and some went back.
> 
> You know where you might find lots of illegals? In Flushing and Chinatown (Maybe little Japan in the East Village)..and they do exactly what I was talking about. They have a sort of black market for their illegals. They have medical services which are off the radar along with other things. However..it's pretty tough to be an illegal in NYC. Shops are frequently checked. It's one of the reasons the garment industry left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There isn't an excuse in the post. You wanted to change the direction of the thread. And I've pretty much gone and explained what I know from personal experience. It might be you that doesn't know what they are talking about..
> 
> Now..answer the question. You know these people are "illegal", how?
Click to expand...


I do know many Illegal's from neighbors to people on the street, through Church, through Pantry, through customers, through people I know that work in and around the hospital and social services. From my perspective, is is as plain as night and day. So is your denial of reality Shallow. We are overwhelmed here. You are misinformed.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I live very close to a major Hospital in NYC. It is packed every day. You know nothing of what you speak. Surprise surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL so because you live close to a hospital that makes you an expert on who goes into it?? Isn't that a lot like palin having foriegn policy experience because she can see russia from her house?? LOL
> 
> BTW since the topic is NOW illegals and their use of emergency rooms can you prove your implication that the one that you "live near" is packed with illegals??
> 
> Face it, once again you've got NOTHING and changing the subject didn't help. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have no clue as to the Chaos your Bullshit helps create Sparky. That's typical though. Just keep compounding the damage, the harm, and tell the rest of us that it's too complicated for us to change. Your Shit runnith over. Clean yourself up.
Click to expand...



So you STILL have no proof of anything that you are saying but you state it's fact because you say so?? LOL So where is your proof that all of those that you allegedly see are illegals?? You provide no proof that the numbers exist as the levels you proclaim and then on top of that you provide no proof concerning how many of what you can't prove exists are actually illegal. LOL 

BTW what are you contributing to ME?? "your BULLSHIT" is just another vague generality from you and I know if I ask you for specifics you will refuse to provide any and try to change the subject but that is to be exceptd from the likes of you now isn't it? 

It's really simple. YOU made claims, I asked YOU for substance and specifics to support YOUR claims and you are doing everything in your power to avoid providing anything REAL. I never said anything was "too coimplicated" I merely asked you simple question about YOUR positions and you can't provide any REAL answers. How typical.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you were around the neighborhood at all you would know that there are hundreds standing on the streets every day waiting for work. You would know that Illegals are not deported here, you would know that the ER is routinely at full capacity. A fairer solution here would be free clinics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about day workers? You know they are illegal, how? Many of them are from Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is part of the United States..and they have a legal right to live anywhere within it's borders they wish too. Many others are legal immigrants. You know where I use to find lots of illegal immigrants? Working for Irish bars. But the economy got better in Ireland and some went back.
> 
> You know where you might find lots of illegals? In Flushing and Chinatown (Maybe little Japan in the East Village)..and they do exactly what I was talking about. They have a sort of black market for their illegals. They have medical services which are off the radar along with other things. However..it's pretty tough to be an illegal in NYC. Shops are frequently checked. It's one of the reasons the garment industry left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
Click to expand...


You have provided nothing of substance to support your claims even as you try to claim others are "wrong" and "have no idea" about what they are talking about. Imagine that.

Do you have ANY proof of your claims or not??


----------



## rightwinger

This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.

Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that. 
Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....

When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

rightwinger said:


> This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.
> 
> Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that.
> Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
> If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....
> 
> When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?



Congressional priorities, none of which will pass the Senate or Obama.

1. Cut Spending, Target Depression Era Programs and Departments for elimination

2. Close the southern border

3. Audit the Federal Reserve We'd like to know who they gave our money to

4. Repeal ObamaCare, pass Whole Foods Health Care

5. Reform Fannie and Freddie so they have no role in single family home mortgages ever again. Out their SFH portfolio up for sale a la RTC.

6. Don't appropriate any funds for any of the Czars.


----------



## drsmith1072

CrusaderFrank said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does someone get hired by providing an invalid Soc Sec #?  I'm at a loss here and I'm not kidding.
> 
> Why hires people that give fake SocSec numbers?  I can understand why Juan Illegal would give a fake number to collect the rest of the check, but what kind of employer hires people without doing any background or credit check. Do they work for the FBI? Homeland Security? Timmy Geithner?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk to meg whitman, R from califonia, who hired a housekeeper with an invalid SS# and did nothing when she was notified that it was invalid.
> I just think it's ridiculous that you would try to pretend it doesn't happen. LOL
> 
> BTW nothing that you said changes the FACT that you lied and tried to put words into my mouth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I didn't lie you fucking retard. I didn't know this was a big problem or a problem at all. It's just the most absurd thing i can imagine
Click to expand...


You did LIE when you claimed 



CrusaderFrank said:


> you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.?



when the FACT is that I *NEVER* made any such claim that they had valid SS#s. 


Fact remains that it does happen and they do pay in and recieve no benefits.


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are tired of it then don't waste other poster's time by responding when you don;lt actually want to debate what is being discussed. LOL
> As for why the costs you only have to look at what you righties allegedly believe and that is the free market.
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other
> 
> Furthermore, it is a bait and switch because he was talking about the comparison of uninsired care to insured care in the emergency room and instead of addressing that you went on a rant about illegals.
> 
> You know, I find it funny that you only respond to posts that you think you can spin as you avoid the majority of the questions asked of you. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reason is beyond you Smith. The only waste of time is your flawed argument. Government has a primary role, and government has a role that it usurped. You don't know the difference between the two, you do not understand the limit of power or jurisdiction, that is why the cost, which is such a small part of the tyranny, is so great.
> 
> Cost of service has a direct relationship to overhead, unpaid services have a direct relationship to overhead. Federal Mandate has a direct relation to overhead. Illegal;s getting services they don't pay for, has a direct relation to overhead. I guess that makes you a lier and a thief, with a piss poor attitude. I'm not your puppet on a string, here to answer your questions. Answer your own questions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If "reason" is beyond anyone here it is YOU. You constantly try to change the subject to avoid debates that you refuse to admit that you can't win.
> You refuse to provide specifics when asked because you know you have none but refuse to admit that you are WRONG and have nothing REAL to add. Now you come at me with the BS offtopic spin about your perception of how the government has "usurped" a role that is not it's own to have even as you claim I don't see what you claim is real but can't substantiate when asked. LOL
> 
> Furthermore, how is asking you questions about your baseless, still unsubstantiated and still contradictory claims consider lying or thievery?? Oh wait that is just your usual attack response when you have nothing REAL to add. Got it. Not once did i claim that those things did not contribute to the cost however, in the end the industry itself decides what to charge based on their own profit margins.
> 
> Do you literally want me to answer my questions about your opinions?? Seems like you are asking me to put words in your mouth. LOL
> 
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other? Why so contradictory?
Click to expand...


I'm not changing the subject, just expanding it. The subject matter is not limited to what you decree. Nor is reality limited to what little you are able to comprehend. The Court has a role in Government. So does Litigation, within reason. The confusing winning an argument in court with the purchase of a winning lottery ticket is an abuse. That abuse contributes to the cost of Service, the cost of insurance, the denial of coverage, the lack of Doctors in specialized fields. The Cost has little to do with the free market, as you well know there is little free market practice in Insurance and Health Care. Nice try though. There is little more regulated. Not all industries get to determine market cost, regardless of the expense to provide that good or service. That too is beyond you. I'm not asking you to put words in my mouth Smith, I'm asking you specifically not to. What you put in your mouth is your business. I don't even want to know. Your reasoning is flawed, as always. It is just plain corrupt.


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Talk to meg whitman, R from califonia, who hired a housekeeper with an invalid SS# and did nothing when she was notified that it was invalid.
> I just think it's ridiculous that you would try to pretend it doesn't happen. LOL
> 
> BTW nothing that you said changes the FACT that you lied and tried to put words into my mouth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't lie you fucking retard. I didn't know this was a big problem or a problem at all. It's just the most absurd thing i can imagine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You did LIE when you claimed
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> you've convinced yourselves that they have valid, not stolen, Social Security numbers so they can pay in and not be paid in cash.?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> when the FACT is that I *NEVER* made any such claim that they had valid SS#s.
> 
> 
> Fact remains that it does happen and they do pay in and recieve no benefits.
Click to expand...


No contradiction there huh.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't an excuse in the post. You wanted to change the direction of the thread. And I've pretty much gone and explained what I know from personal experience. It might be you that doesn't know what they are talking about..
> 
> Now..answer the question. You know these people are "illegal", how?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do know many Illegal's from neighbors to people on the street, through Church, through Pantry, through customers, through people I know that work in and around the hospital and social services. From my perspective, is is as plain as night and day. So is your denial of reality Shallow. We are overwhelmed here. You are misinformed.
Click to expand...


And they told they were illegal?

And you know them through Church, how? They told you? You were doing charity work? What? 

You work for the hospital? You check them in?

What customers? They work for the department of immigration?

I am asking you how you know?

I work with people from other countries that come here on work visas. They aren't illegal. How do I know? I asked them.

Come up with specifics. And let me know if they are going to emergency rooms.

Incensed.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are making excuses. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't an excuse in the post. You wanted to change the direction of the thread. And I've pretty much gone and explained what I know from personal experience. It might be you that doesn't know what they are talking about..
> 
> Now..answer the question. You know these people are "illegal", how?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do know many Illegal's from neighbors to people on the street, through Church, through Pantry, through customers, through people I know that work in and around the hospital and social services. From my perspective, is is as plain as night and day. So is your denial of reality Shallow. We are overwhelmed here. You are misinformed.
Click to expand...


So when did you start believing that your "perception" is above reproach and is considered to be reality?? 
Disagreeing with your baseless and unproven perceptions is not denial of reality. 
Thanks for showing how literally insane you truly are. If YOU believe it, then it has to be true. LOL


----------



## Sallow

rightwinger said:


> This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.
> 
> Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that.
> Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
> If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....
> 
> When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?



Well they start with vague generalities then go for the illegal immigrant thing..because it's rote and easy.

But seriously..see if any president can address this problem? Regan tried, Bush tried..and they couldn't. Why? Lots of businesses love having powerless cheap labor. And on the whole it's a gain to government coffers.

But yeah..there are no serious answers from the Tea Party..just lots of rage and anger.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't an excuse in the post. You wanted to change the direction of the thread. And I've pretty much gone and explained what I know from personal experience. It might be you that doesn't know what they are talking about..
> 
> Now..answer the question. You know these people are "illegal", how?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do know many Illegal's from neighbors to people on the street, through Church, through Pantry, through customers, through people I know that work in and around the hospital and social services. From my perspective, is is as plain as night and day. So is your denial of reality Shallow. We are overwhelmed here. You are misinformed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And they told they were illegal?
> 
> And you know them through Church, how? They told you? You were doing charity work? What?
> 
> You work for the hospital? You check them in?
> 
> What customers? They work for the department of immigration?
> 
> I am asking you how you know?
> 
> I work with people from other countries that come here on work visas. They aren't illegal. How do I know? I asked them.
> 
> Come up with specifics. And let me know if they are going to emergency rooms.
> 
> Incensed.
Click to expand...


I ask them and I know. It's not all that complicated Sallow. The rules here are very easily bent. My kids grew up here, my best friend is a Priest, my wife runs a pantry, Also through her job, which I will not mention, we deal with stuff all the time. You act like it's impossible to know. How many Hospitals around the Country are in trouble because of this issue. St. John's Hospital Just closed this year, that's two locations in Queens. The formula for health care is too convoluted. It is at crisis level and will bankrupt us.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reason is beyond you Smith. The only waste of time is your flawed argument. Government has a primary role, and government has a role that it usurped. You don't know the difference between the two, you do not understand the limit of power or jurisdiction, that is why the cost, which is such a small part of the tyranny, is so great.
> 
> Cost of service has a direct relationship to overhead, unpaid services have a direct relationship to overhead. Federal Mandate has a direct relation to overhead. Illegal;s getting services they don't pay for, has a direct relation to overhead. I guess that makes you a lier and a thief, with a piss poor attitude. I'm not your puppet on a string, here to answer your questions. Answer your own questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If "reason" is beyond anyone here it is YOU. You constantly try to change the subject to avoid debates that you refuse to admit that you can't win.
> You refuse to provide specifics when asked because you know you have none but refuse to admit that you are WRONG and have nothing REAL to add. Now you come at me with the BS offtopic spin about your perception of how the government has "usurped" a role that is not it's own to have even as you claim I don't see what you claim is real but can't substantiate when asked. LOL
> 
> Furthermore, how is asking you questions about your baseless, still unsubstantiated and still contradictory claims consider lying or thievery?? Oh wait that is just your usual attack response when you have nothing REAL to add. Got it. Not once did i claim that those things did not contribute to the cost however, in the end the industry itself decides what to charge based on their own profit margins.
> 
> Do you literally want me to answer my questions about your opinions?? Seems like you are asking me to put words in your mouth. LOL
> 
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other? Why so contradictory?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not changing the subject, just expanding it. The subject matter is not limited to what you decree. Nor is reality limited to what little you are able to comprehend. The Court has a role in Government. So does Litigation, within reason. The confusing winning an argument in court with the purchase of a winning lottery ticket is an abuse. That abuse contributes to the cost of Service, the cost of insurance, the denial of coverage, the lack of Doctors in specialized fields. The Cost has little to do with the free market, as you well know there is little free market practice in Insurance and Health Care. Nice try though. There is little more regulated. Not all industries get to determine market cost, regardless of the expense to provide that good or service. That too is beyond you. I'm not asking you to put words in my mouth Smith, I'm asking you specifically not to. What you put in your mouth is your business. I don't even want to know. Your reasoning is flawed, as always. It is just plain corrupt.
Click to expand...


If you are asked what color the red and blue shirts are and you go off into a rant about the rainbow you are trying to change the subject not expanding it. They are not the same topic merely becuase they both deal with colors. 

BTW your spiel about litigation still doesn't explain your contradiction of promoting "Government interference" where litigation is concerned even as you try to complain about "Government interference" in the healthcare industry. Why so contradictory?

So are you actually trying to argue that the heath industry doesn't increase the cost of procedures based on their profit margins and has no control?? If that is the case, do you care to PROVE that assertion instead of merely making the claim?? 

Furthermore, I have put no words into your mouth but instead of have asked you SPECIFIC questions about your own statements that you refuse to answer. For instance I asked you about your contradiction and you provide a response that mentions litigation and limiting it "within reason" which has to be done through "Government interference." However, you failed to address how that contradicts with your complaint about "Government interference" within that same post. Why is that?


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.
> 
> Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that.
> Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
> If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....
> 
> When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well they start with vague generalities then go for the illegal immigrant thing..because it's rote and easy.
> 
> But seriously..see if any president can address this problem? Regan tried, Bush tried..and they couldn't. Why? Lots of businesses love having powerless cheap labor. And on the whole it's a gain to government coffers.
> 
> But yeah..there are no serious answers from the Tea Party..just lots of rage and anger.
Click to expand...


Come now shallow. You are just bitter because of all the lost ground from yesterday's election. Take solace in the few key victories you had. 

Maybe it's time for the Individual States to play a more significant role. Let's give Federalism a chance, it's been too long a while since it's been tried. Centralized one size fits all government cheats everybody. It's excessive and wasteful.


----------



## Intense

drsmith1072 said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If "reason" is beyond anyone here it is YOU. You constantly try to change the subject to avoid debates that you refuse to admit that you can't win.
> You refuse to provide specifics when asked because you know you have none but refuse to admit that you are WRONG and have nothing REAL to add. Now you come at me with the BS offtopic spin about your perception of how the government has "usurped" a role that is not it's own to have even as you claim I don't see what you claim is real but can't substantiate when asked. LOL
> 
> Furthermore, how is asking you questions about your baseless, still unsubstantiated and still contradictory claims consider lying or thievery?? Oh wait that is just your usual attack response when you have nothing REAL to add. Got it. Not once did i claim that those things did not contribute to the cost however, in the end the industry itself decides what to charge based on their own profit margins.
> 
> Do you literally want me to answer my questions about your opinions?? Seems like you are asking me to put words in your mouth. LOL
> 
> BTW how can you, on one hand, complain about lawsuits which would have to be limited by "Government interference" even as you try to complain about "Government interference" on the other? Why so contradictory?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not changing the subject, just expanding it. The subject matter is not limited to what you decree. Nor is reality limited to what little you are able to comprehend. The Court has a role in Government. So does Litigation, within reason. The confusing winning an argument in court with the purchase of a winning lottery ticket is an abuse. That abuse contributes to the cost of Service, the cost of insurance, the denial of coverage, the lack of Doctors in specialized fields. The Cost has little to do with the free market, as you well know there is little free market practice in Insurance and Health Care. Nice try though. There is little more regulated. Not all industries get to determine market cost, regardless of the expense to provide that good or service. That too is beyond you. I'm not asking you to put words in my mouth Smith, I'm asking you specifically not to. What you put in your mouth is your business. I don't even want to know. Your reasoning is flawed, as always. It is just plain corrupt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are asked what color the red and blue shirts are and you go off into a rant about the rainbow you are trying to change the subject not expanding it. They are not the same topic merely becuase they both deal with colors.
> 
> BTW your spiel about litigation still doesn't explain your contradiction of promoting "Government interference" where litigation is concerned even as you try to complain about "Government interference" in the healthcare industry. Why so contradictory?
> 
> So are you actually trying to argue that the heath industry doesn't increase the cost of procedures based on their profit margins and has no control?? If that is the case, do you care to PROVE that assertion instead of merely making the claim??
> 
> Furthermore, I have put no words into your mouth but instead of have asked you SPECIFIC questions about your own statements that you refuse to answer. For instance I asked you about your contradiction and you provide a response that mentions litigation and limiting it "within reason" which has to be done through "Government interference." However, you failed to address how that contradicts with your complaint about "Government interference" within that same post. Why is that?
Click to expand...


Again You talk out of both sides of your mouth. To you something is a contradiction because you are incapable of grasping the meaning. That is a false premise. That is in effect what you base your philosophy of life on, false premise. There is no contradiction between the established role of the court, and the court overstepping it's authority, be it criminal or civil. There are appeals and rulings being overturned all the time. I personally know Surgeons that no longer practice because of the cost of Liability Insurance V.S. the compensation they are paid for the service. Government and Insurance dictate that. Though I know people in the Insurance Billing industry, it is not for m,e to say. Ask an Expert. I doubt you even care, other than to bitch and complain.


----------



## Cuyo

CrusaderFrank said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.
> 
> Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that.
> Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
> If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....
> 
> When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congressional priorities, none of which will pass the Senate or Obama.
> 
> 1. Cut Spending, Target Depression Era Programs and Departments for elimination
> 
> 2. Close the southern border
> 
> 3. Audit the Federal Reserve We'd like to know who they gave our money to
> 
> 4. Repeal ObamaCare, pass Whole Foods Health Care
> 
> 5. Reform Fannie and Freddie so they have no role in single family home mortgages ever again. Out their SFH portfolio up for sale a la RTC.
> 
> 6. Don't appropriate any funds for any of the Czars.
Click to expand...


1. Specifically, what programs.  If you're talking SS and Medicare, they have their own income streams.  Eliminating them would be a wash, unless they were supplemented with other income sources.  If you're talking about any other programs... There's not much there to cut.
2. You'll have to show me where that's any sort of "Cut" at all.  Sounds more like a soundbyte.
3. Fair enough, I think we'd all like to know that... But the whole of TARP plus the expended stimulus funds don't even nearly approach this years deficit, let alone the debt.  FYI I don't think you'll find an economist on earth that will tell you these programs (or similar programs) were un-necessary under the circumstances, how we got there notwithstanding.
4. "Obamacare" has had zero effect on our deficit as of yet.  Speculate away as to future impact, but this does not address the current deficit whatsoever.
5. Delving into mortgage lending will be instrumental in preventing another meltdown, but is irrelevant to the topic at hand.  
6. The "Czars" don't have "Funds" "Appropriated" to them in their capacity as a "Czar."  In fact the term "Czar" is often a creation of the media.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against


It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.


----------



## daveman

editec said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington? it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What _quid pro quo_ deal do you think the GOP can offer to the Dems that will make them go along with extending the tax cuts for billionaires, Lone?
> 
> Serious question.
> 
> If politics is the art of compromise (and it has to be given our division in Congress) what compromise do you belive the GOP can offer to the Dems?
Click to expand...

The only compromise Dems will accept is their version of bipartisanship:  Do what the Democrats say and STFU.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> I ask them and I know. It's not all that complicated Sallow. The rules here are very easily bent. My kids grew up here, my best friend is a Priest, my wife runs a pantry, Also through her job, which I will not mention, we deal with stuff all the time. You act like it's impossible to know. How many Hospitals around the Country are in trouble because of this issue. St. John's Hospital Just closed this year, that's two locations in Queens. The formula for health care is too convoluted. It is at crisis level and will bankrupt us.



Again..I've seen nothing that indicates that illegal immigrants are a drain on the economy. There's something like 13 million (and shrinking) in a country of over 300 million. That's a pretty small amount.

And then you jump into this "convoluted" health care thing. What's convoluted about it? Revenue streams are pretty clear. 500 billion or so comes from reducing waste and cost cutting from Medicare. The rest of it is made up with people paying into the system itself. Where is the "cost" coming from? That fact that it's like 2000 pages long..is because of all the provisions Republicans larded into it..to make it to big to pass.

"Free" health clinics are not going to happen. For a variety of reasons. And since we just to let people here "drop dead" something's got to be done about the cost..which has been going up every single year..while services are being cut back. That..really made no sense.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is going exactly where I thought it would. Namely, showing that the tea party is unwilling to make the tough cuts in spending or tax increased that are needed to get to a balanced budget.
> 
> Cutting "waste' is not an answer. Every politician for 200 years has promised that.
> Earmarks are small potatoes and will have minimal impact. Besides, everyone is willing to cut other peoples earmarks but not offer up their own
> If we are serious about cutting debt we need to make the hard cuts. We need to redefine the misssion of the Armed Forces, end two wars entirely, raise the retirement age, cut welfare at both the individual and corporate levels.....
> 
> When will the Tea Party stand up and offer up some real spending savings?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well they start with vague generalities then go for the illegal immigrant thing..because it's rote and easy.
> 
> But seriously..see if any president can address this problem? Regan tried, Bush tried..and they couldn't. Why? Lots of businesses love having powerless cheap labor. And on the whole it's a gain to government coffers.
> 
> But yeah..there are no serious answers from the Tea Party..just lots of rage and anger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Come now shallow. You are just bitter because of all the lost ground from yesterday's election. Take solace in the few key victories you had.
> 
> Maybe it's time for the Individual States to play a more significant role. Let's give Federalism a chance, it's been too long a while since it's been tried. Centralized one size fits all government cheats everybody. It's excessive and wasteful.
Click to expand...


I'm not angry. This about guarantees President Obama's re-election.

And the whole "Indivdual States" thing has been settled since the civil war. No you can't have slaves. Nope. Not a one.


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
Click to expand...


That's the point Dave, there is no answer.  The "Answer" is that without tax increases, we will be running a deficit for quite some time.

We don't claim to have "The Answer," just pointing out that the tea-crowd doesn't.  They nonchalantly say "Cut Taxes! Balance the budget!" but it's clearly not that simple.


----------



## rightwinger

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
Click to expand...


There are plenty of answers I would accept

- Social Security
- Medicare
- Iraq and Afghanistan
- Defense Spending
- Social Programs
- Farm Subsidies
- Business incentives
- Student Loans

There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the point Dave, there is no answer.  The "Answer" is that without tax increases, we will be running a deficit for quite some time.
> 
> We don't claim to have "The Answer," just pointing out that the tea-crowd doesn't.  They nonchalantly say "Cut Taxes! Balance the budget!" but it's clearly not that simple.
Click to expand...

It's got a better chance of succeeding than "Keep spending money that doesn't even exist!"

The left complained about the deficit...when Bush was in office.  With Obama in, not a peep from them.


----------



## Synthaholic

California Girl said:


> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.



Too late!  He's already made America better.

Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
Click to expand...

I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.

When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I ask them and I know. It's not all that complicated Sallow. The rules here are very easily bent. My kids grew up here, my best friend is a Priest, my wife runs a pantry, Also through her job, which I will not mention, we deal with stuff all the time. You act like it's impossible to know. How many Hospitals around the Country are in trouble because of this issue. St. John's Hospital Just closed this year, that's two locations in Queens. The formula for health care is too convoluted. It is at crisis level and will bankrupt us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again..I've seen nothing that indicates that illegal immigrants are a drain on the economy. There's something like 13 million (and shrinking) in a country of over 300 million. That's a pretty small amount.
> 
> And then you jump into this "convoluted" health care thing. What's convoluted about it? Revenue streams are pretty clear. 500 billion or so comes from reducing waste and cost cutting from Medicare. The rest of it is made up with people paying into the system itself. Where is the "cost" coming from? That fact that it's like 2000 pages long..is because of all the provisions Republicans larded into it..to make it to big to pass.
> 
> "Free" health clinics are not going to happen. For a variety of reasons. And since we just to let people here "drop dead" something's got to be done about the cost..which has been going up every single year..while services are being cut back. That..really made no sense.
Click to expand...


13 million??? Where in NY? Maybe a tiny bit high. Seriously, you don't believe that number, not seriously. Here is the thing, at least related to Mexico, should the situation deteriorate much further, we are going to have a bunch of Political Refugees on our hands. It would be prudent to prepare for that. Should that happen, don't be surprised if those Immigration Numbers Triple, as in people already here, plus the borders being swarmed..I do have a Customer that is a Immigration Lawyer, his office is in Jackson Heights. You do know that if an Illegal can hang here ten years under the radar, without being snagged, they have a legal path to Citizenship?


----------



## Intense

Queens has been touted as a diverse borough that is home to immigrants from all over the globe, and a key component of New York City's melting pot.


But the sheer number of cultures represented by its 2.2 million residents truly sets the borough apart from the rest of the city and beyond, according to new figures released last week.

"Queens is probably one of the most diverse places on Earth," said Joseph Salvo, a well-known demographer with the city Planning Department. "There are 1 million immigrants and a mix that is perhaps unprecedented in this borough's history."

Salvo described recent borough population trends for a group of Queens officials last week with the help of a dizzying array of charts and graphs.

The foreign-born population of Queens increased 6.3% between 2000 and 2006, he said.

That population is almost equally divided among a number of Asian and Hispanic groups hailing from countries including China, Guyana, Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, India and Korea.

China tops the list, accounting for 11% of Queens' foreign-born population. That includes people from Hong Kong and Taiwan.

A look at race and origin also underscores the unique complexion of Queens, Salvo said.



Read more: Queens one of &#39;most diverse places on Earth,&#39; new figures show


----------



## Intense

"Queens has quite a different profile, with equal components of the major groups," he said, referring to categories of white non-Hispanic, Hispanic, black non-Hispanic, Asian and multi-racial.

The surge in Hispanic groups in Queens is most notable among Ecuadorans. It jumped 68.9% between 2000 and 2006. The number of Mexicans increased 30%.

Mexicans are now the largest immigrant group in Astoria, an area once dominated by Greeks and Italians.

Assemblyman José Peralta, a first-generation Dominican-American, said growing numbers of Mexicans and Ecuadorans are settling in Jackson Heights and Corona as they find well-established enclaves there.

"The Colombians and Dominicans have been here longer and are moving from rentals to buying homes in East Elmhurst, Long Island and New Jersey," said Peralta. "In some cases, the Dominicans are renting out their properties to new waves of immigrants who are making Corona their home."

In 1970, only 21% of the borough's population was foreign-born. In 2000, that number jumped to more than 46%.

The constant flow into Queens of immigrants, who generally open small businesses, helps keep the local economy running, Peralta said.

"They are the economic engine that is vital for the borough," he said.

lcolangelo@nydailynews.com





Read more: Queens one of &#39;most diverse places on Earth,&#39; new figures show


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well they start with vague generalities then go for the illegal immigrant thing..because it's rote and easy.
> 
> But seriously..see if any president can address this problem? Regan tried, Bush tried..and they couldn't. Why? Lots of businesses love having powerless cheap labor. And on the whole it's a gain to government coffers.
> 
> But yeah..there are no serious answers from the Tea Party..just lots of rage and anger.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come now shallow. You are just bitter because of all the lost ground from yesterday's election. Take solace in the few key victories you had.
> 
> Maybe it's time for the Individual States to play a more significant role. Let's give Federalism a chance, it's been too long a while since it's been tried. Centralized one size fits all government cheats everybody. It's excessive and wasteful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not angry. This about guarantees President Obama's re-election.
> 
> And the whole "Indivdual States" thing has been settled since the civil war. No you can't have slaves. Nope. Not a one.
Click to expand...


Federalism is what The Constitution Establishes. We are a Federal Republic. The Civil War did not take away the Federal Republic. It did not cease to be because of the failed succession of the South. What is with you? What about Representative Government scares you so much?


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
Click to expand...


How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.


----------



## daveman

Intense said:


> Federalism is what The Constitution Establishes. We are a Federal Republic. The Civil War did not take away the Federal Republic. It did not cease to be because of the failed succession of the South. What is with you? What about Representative Government scares you so much?


The stupid proles refuse to let him run their lives.  They don't recognize his clear superiority.


----------



## daveman

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
Click to expand...

Impossible with Synth.  All he has is "Obama is _ever_ so dreamy!!"


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come now shallow. You are just bitter because of all the lost ground from yesterday's election. Take solace in the few key victories you had.
> 
> Maybe it's time for the Individual States to play a more significant role. Let's give Federalism a chance, it's been too long a while since it's been tried. Centralized one size fits all government cheats everybody. It's excessive and wasteful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not angry. This about guarantees President Obama's re-election.
> 
> And the whole "Indivdual States" thing has been settled since the civil war. No you can't have slaves. Nope. Not a one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Federalism is what The Constitution Establishes. We are a Federal Republic. The Civil War did not take away the Federal Republic. It did not cease to be because of the failed succession of the South. What is with you? What about Representative Government scares you so much?
Click to expand...


Nothing.

What scares you about it? The Constitution establishes representative government. The congress passes legislation that must be followed by the states. The states are granted a certain amount of autonomy to deal with regional affairs. For example, prostitution is legal in Nevada..but not in New York.

But states can't start challenging Constitutional supremacy. That's in there as well.

Why does that scare you?


----------



## Intense

Does he get a tingle up his leg like  Chris Whiffle Ball? Meet the Depressed, the Stressed.  You know What's his name.


----------



## rightwinger

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
Click to expand...


It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?

If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.

It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not angry. This about guarantees President Obama's re-election.
> 
> And the whole "Indivdual States" thing has been settled since the civil war. No you can't have slaves. Nope. Not a one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Federalism is what The Constitution Establishes. We are a Federal Republic. The Civil War did not take away the Federal Republic. It did not cease to be because of the failed succession of the South. What is with you? What about Representative Government scares you so much?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing.
> 
> What scares you about it? The Constitution establishes representative government. The congress passes legislation that must be followed by the states. The states are granted a certain amount of autonomy to deal with regional affairs. For example, prostitution is legal in Nevada..but not in New York.
> 
> But states can't start challenging Constitutional supremacy. That's in there as well.
> 
> Why does that scare you?
Click to expand...


But They Can Challenge Jurisdiction and Constitutional Application, and what it really say's as opposed to what we think it says. The Key here is Due Process and The Rule of Law. Constitutional Interpretation, as it stands now, is only what a standing Supreme Court say's it is, that can sadly be subject to arbitrary rulings and translations, which can be just as arbitrarily reversed. That is where the Amendment Process comes in. There is No Law more Powerful. The States can have a very important role in that. Personally, I would love to see the abomination of what was done to the "Commerce Claus", addressed. Again, Power gone wild. Back on point. You are grossly misinformed. The Federal Government has It's Jurisdiction, The States have Their Jurisdiction. You forget that. Living in the present, understand that there is immense power there. The Obama Administration is going to learn that the hard way, if it continues to deal with Arizona underhandedly.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
Click to expand...

Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
Click to expand...


I 'd agree. I'd put some bases near our borders too. The answer needs to be focused on necessity, not convenience, not even livelihood, unless you want to pay my taxes and bills for me.  I mean feel free.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I 'd agree. I'd put some bases near our borders too. The answer needs to be focused on necessity, not convenience, not even livelihood, unless you want to pay my taxes and bills for me.  I mean feel free.
Click to expand...


Sorry,
Bases cost money to build. We are supposed to be cutting spending


----------



## rightwinger

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
Click to expand...


Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts


----------



## Trajan

The Rabbi said:


> Hmm, let's see.  Obama and Democrats ran in '08 on a bunch of slogans.  They took control of both houses of Congress and the White House by filibuster proof majorities.  Yet Nutwinger never called on them to stand and deliver.  And when they did, the country got in a worse mess than ever.
> Now the GOP has control of the House and he challenges them to start governing like they staged a coup.
> Memo: Dems still control the Senate and Obama is still the president.
> My question is: OK Dems.  You've lost control of the House but still have a big role in government.  What are you going to do to solve all these problems?



outta rep dude, sorry...hit you tomorrow...


I guess this is what amounts to a come to a jesus moment for 'brave' Sir Robin....


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
Click to expand...


While we're at it, let's separate Bush and Obama.  The items you list were started under Bush, continued under Obama.

No, I was speaking of consumer protections in credit cards / the discontinuation of 'pre-existing condition' denial / the fact that they cannot drop your coverage when you get sick /  the fact that you can now stay on your parent's insurance until you are 25 / the fact that he saved the auto industry, which is now getting back to profitability - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that TARP has been repaid - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that 40% of the stimulus was tax-cuts / the fact that we didn't plunge into a depression / 

things like that.


----------



## Synthaholic

daveman said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Impossible with Synth.  All he has is "Obama is _ever_ so dreamy!!"
Click to expand...

He's got a great 3-point shot, ya gotta admit.


----------



## Stephanie

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget all the money they save by cutting NPR and NEA
Click to expand...


Those are THE FRIST TWO to GO..
bye bye...they can go out and beg for their own friggen money. Or call up Georgie Soros.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I 'd agree. I'd put some bases near our borders too. The answer needs to be focused on necessity, not convenience, not even livelihood, unless you want to pay my taxes and bills for me.  I mean feel free.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry,
> Bases cost money to build. We are supposed to be cutting spending
Click to expand...


Border Integrity is a Responsibility, of the Federal Government, National Security takes priority to your or my feelings. Border Security is a Fail for how long now?


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
> 
> 
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
Click to expand...


Federal Jobs. What Remains could consider a regular 40 hour work week. How's that hit you. Those effected would have to work for a living.  It can be done.


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> While we're at it, let's separate Bush and Obama.  The items you list were started under Bush, continued under Obama.
> 
> No, I was speaking of consumer protections in credit cards / the discontinuation of 'pre-existing condition' denial / the fact that they cannot drop your coverage when you get sick /  the fact that you can now stay on your parent's insurance until you are 25 / the fact that he saved the auto industry, which is now getting back to profitability - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that TARP has been repaid - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that 40% of the stimulus was tax-cuts / the fact that we didn't plunge into a depression /
> 
> things like that.
Click to expand...


Like in Follow The Yellow Brick Road? Yeah, I get it, Lion's and Tigers, and Bears, Follow The Yellow Brick Road.  When you learn to separate propaganda from reality let me know.


----------



## Intense

Stephanie said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cuts?
> 
> I mean..the stuff the Tea Party has put on the table really amounts to very little and does more harm then good in the long run.
> 
> -Cut the Department of Education? Oh goody..no national standards and buh bye to college grants.
> -Cut OSHA? Yep back to the good old days of miners dropping like flies and people getting burned alive in factories.
> -Cut the EPA? Well dirty water, tarnished earth and crappy air worked so well a century ago. Why not bring it back.
> -Get rid of Social Security? Well you might save a bit of cash..but seniors who made a mistake or two would be back to living in squalor and dying in misery.
> -Get rid of Medicare? Now your talking. That's a high ticket item. And it basically insures that the life span of Americans will be cut by a quarter.
> -Get rid of Welfare? Well it's always a good idea for inner cities to deprive the improvished of any means of getting out of their holes. Good for the crime rate and prison industries too.
> 
> Even with all of this..we'd still be running deficits unless taxes were raised.
> 
> Or Military expenditures cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget all the money they save by cutting NPR and NEA
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those are THE FRIST TWO to GO..
> bye bye...they can go out and beg for their own friggen money. Or call up Georgie Soros.
Click to expand...


Scam after scam, the Elite think that just because they fool the masses for a time, they got away with the crime. They want to raise our taxes and exempt themselves from that which they continually burden us with. It gets so old.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I 'd agree. I'd put some bases near our borders too. The answer needs to be focused on necessity, not convenience, not even livelihood, unless you want to pay my taxes and bills for me.  I mean feel free.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry,
> Bases cost money to build. We are supposed to be cutting spending
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Border Integrity is a Responsibility, of the Federal Government, National Security takes priority to your or my feelings. Border Security is a Fail for how long now?
Click to expand...


Sorry....

Can't afford it. Border Security costs money and the Republicans just got elected on cutting spending not increasing it

Spend, Spend, Spend


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry,
> Bases cost money to build. We are supposed to be cutting spending
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Border Integrity is a Responsibility, of the Federal Government, National Security takes priority to your or my feelings. Border Security is a Fail for how long now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry....
> 
> Can't afford it. Border Security costs money and the Republicans just got elected on cutting spending not increasing it
> 
> Spend, Spend, Spend
Click to expand...


The Constitution spells out providing for the national defense.

The other crap is expendable.


----------



## Intense

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Border Integrity is a Responsibility, of the Federal Government, National Security takes priority to your or my feelings. Border Security is a Fail for how long now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....
> 
> Can't afford it. Border Security costs money and the Republicans just got elected on cutting spending not increasing it
> 
> Spend, Spend, Spend
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution spells out providing for the national defense.
> 
> The other crap is expendable.
Click to expand...


That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Federal Jobs. What Remains could consider a regular 40 hour work week. How's that hit you. Those effected would have to work for a living.  It can be done.
Click to expand...


Ok....now we see where you are going

You have just added 3 million people to the unemployment roles not to mention an additional 10 million private sector jobs dependent on the government.
Unemployment rate just topped 15%

Social Security does not get paid, veterans do not get paid, military does not get paid, no student loans, no farm support, no food safety, no environmental checks, FAA shut down, FCC shut down, no interstate highway maintenance, no government contracts for anything


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Federal Jobs. What Remains could consider a regular 40 hour work week. How's that hit you. Those effected would have to work for a living.  It can be done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ok....now we see where you are going
> 
> You have just added 3 million people to the unemployment roles not to mention an additional 10 million private sector jobs dependent on the government.
> Unemployment rate just topped 15%
> 
> Social Security does not get paid, veterans do not get paid, military does not get paid, no student loans, no farm support, no food safety, no environmental checks, FAA shut down, FCC shut down, no interstate highway maintenance, no government contracts for anything
Click to expand...


Some of it gets paid.

That's what I call a soft landing, compared to, say Greece.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....
> 
> Can't afford it. Border Security costs money and the Republicans just got elected on cutting spending not increasing it
> 
> Spend, Spend, Spend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution spells out providing for the national defense.
> 
> The other crap is expendable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.
Click to expand...


Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.

Why am I not surprised?


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution spells out providing for the national defense.
> 
> The other crap is expendable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
Click to expand...


Eliminate the Department of Education, which educates nobody, and the Department of Energy, which creates no energy.

Better?


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not changing the subject, just expanding it. The subject matter is not limited to what you decree. Nor is reality limited to what little you are able to comprehend. The Court has a role in Government. So does Litigation, within reason. The confusing winning an argument in court with the purchase of a winning lottery ticket is an abuse. That abuse contributes to the cost of Service, the cost of insurance, the denial of coverage, the lack of Doctors in specialized fields. The Cost has little to do with the free market, as you well know there is little free market practice in Insurance and Health Care. Nice try though. There is little more regulated. Not all industries get to determine market cost, regardless of the expense to provide that good or service. That too is beyond you. I'm not asking you to put words in my mouth Smith, I'm asking you specifically not to. What you put in your mouth is your business. I don't even want to know. Your reasoning is flawed, as always. It is just plain corrupt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are asked what color the red and blue shirts are and you go off into a rant about the rainbow you are trying to change the subject not expanding it. They are not the same topic merely becuase they both deal with colors.
> 
> BTW your spiel about litigation still doesn't explain your contradiction of promoting "Government interference" where litigation is concerned even as you try to complain about "Government interference" in the healthcare industry. Why so contradictory?
> 
> So are you actually trying to argue that the heath industry doesn't increase the cost of procedures based on their profit margins and has no control?? If that is the case, do you care to PROVE that assertion instead of merely making the claim??
> 
> Furthermore, I have put no words into your mouth but instead of have asked you SPECIFIC questions about your own statements that you refuse to answer. For instance I asked you about your contradiction and you provide a response that mentions litigation and limiting it "within reason" which has to be done through "Government interference." However, you failed to address how that contradicts with your complaint about "Government interference" within that same post. Why is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again You talk out of both sides of your mouth. To you something is a contradiction because you are incapable of grasping the meaning. That is a false premise. That is in effect what you base your philosophy of life on, false premise. There is no contradiction between the established role of the court, and the court overstepping it's authority, be it criminal or civil. There are appeals and rulings being overturned all the time. I personally know Surgeons that no longer practice because of the cost of Liability Insurance V.S. the compensation they are paid for the service. Government and Insurance dictate that. Though I know people in the Insurance Billing industry, it is not for m,e to say. Ask an Expert. I doubt you even care, other than to bitch and complain.
Click to expand...


WOW! There you go being dishonest as you try to put words into my mouth, AGAIN. 
I know the REAL meaning of the word so don't even try to tell me how *I* define a word you worthless hack. 
The fact is that you complained about litigation when the usual response for that from the right is torte reform which involves "Government interference" even as you complained about "Government interference" as a reason for the increased cost and that is a contradiction. You can't be both in favor and against "Government interference" and not be contradictory. There in lies your contradiction and no amount of spin or attempts to change the subject will change that FACT. 

The debate was NOT about the "established role of the court, and the court overstepping it's authority" but instead about YOUR contradictory statements about litigation "within reason" and  "Government interference" so why try to change the subject AGAIN? Is that your answer to every deabte that you know you will lose?? LOL 

"it's not for you to say," really?? Why stop there when you have inserted your opinion as if it were fact so many times already??


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Federal Jobs. What Remains could consider a regular 40 hour work week. How's that hit you. Those effected would have to work for a living.  It can be done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok....now we see where you are going
> 
> You have just added 3 million people to the unemployment roles not to mention an additional 10 million private sector jobs dependent on the government.
> Unemployment rate just topped 15%
> 
> Social Security does not get paid, veterans do not get paid, military does not get paid, no student loans, no farm support, no food safety, no environmental checks, FAA shut down, FCC shut down, no interstate highway maintenance, no government contracts for anything
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some of it gets paid.
> 
> That's what I call a soft landing, compared to, say Greece.
Click to expand...


Well what is it?  You say you are going to cut spending, but can't identify what you will cut. Intense here even starts spending more.

What spending will you cut to balance the budget and pay for Bush tax cuts?


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok....now we see where you are going
> 
> You have just added 3 million people to the unemployment roles not to mention an additional 10 million private sector jobs dependent on the government.
> Unemployment rate just topped 15%
> 
> Social Security does not get paid, veterans do not get paid, military does not get paid, no student loans, no farm support, no food safety, no environmental checks, FAA shut down, FCC shut down, no interstate highway maintenance, no government contracts for anything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some of it gets paid.
> 
> That's what I call a soft landing, compared to, say Greece.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well what is it?  You say you are going to cut spending, but can't identify what you will cut. Intense here even starts spending more.
> 
> What spending will you cut to balance the budget and pay for Bush tax cuts?
Click to expand...


We can cut spending you like and still have plenty left for Constitutionally prescribed parts of government.

The Bush tax cuts were paid for except for the Obama spending increases.


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eliminate the Department of Education, which educates nobody, and the Department of Energy, which creates no energy.
> 
> Better?
Click to expand...


Thank you

It took some time, but someone is actually identifying what to cut. At least you have some backbone.

So lets cut the Dept of Energy


United States Department of Energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government concerned with the United States' policies regarding energy and safety in handling nuclear material. Its responsibilities include the nation's nuclear weapons program, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy conservation, energy-related research, radioactive waste disposal, and domestic energy production. DOE also sponsors more basic and applied scientific research than any other US federal agency; most of this is funded through its system of United States Department of Energy National Laboratories

Now all government funded energy research is gone, other countries take the lead in energy research, our nuclear program is now nonexistant, all reactors must shut down, no more nuclear weapons, the Navy must dock its carriers and subs, nuclear waste piles up.

Want to kill the Dept of Education next?


----------



## drsmith1072

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the point Dave, there is no answer.  The "Answer" is that without tax increases, we will be running a deficit for quite some time.
> 
> We don't claim to have "The Answer," just pointing out that the tea-crowd doesn't.  They nonchalantly say "Cut Taxes! Balance the budget!" but it's clearly not that simple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's got a better chance of succeeding than "Keep spending money that doesn't even exist!"
> 
> The left complained about the deficit...when Bush was in office.  With Obama in, not a peep from them.
Click to expand...


Vague generalities have NO chance of getting anything done, so why pretend that they do?

Actually many did remain silent but a few on the left did complain about it when obama was in office. However, I didn't hear a lot of complaining about the deficits from the right when W was in charge but they sure became vocal after a democrat entered the WH didn't they? It's amazing how that cuts both ways isn't it? LOL


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok....now we see where you are going
> 
> You have just added 3 million people to the unemployment roles not to mention an additional 10 million private sector jobs dependent on the government.
> Unemployment rate just topped 15%
> 
> Social Security does not get paid, veterans do not get paid, military does not get paid, no student loans, no farm support, no food safety, no environmental checks, FAA shut down, FCC shut down, no interstate highway maintenance, no government contracts for anything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some of it gets paid.
> 
> That's what I call a soft landing, compared to, say Greece.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well what is it?  You say you are going to cut spending, but can't identify what you will cut. Intense here even starts spending more.
> 
> What spending will you cut to balance the budget and pay for Bush tax cuts?
Click to expand...


Oh, No I don't. You are a slippery rascal now aren't you. Move some of those Military Bases in high real estate areas to where they are needed. Sell that Property. Seems anytime someone does anything you don't like the sky falls in on us. Why's that?  Mean while those Government raises just keep on going and going and growing, Self Importance Syndrome. How much to cross the GWB or the Tappan Zee? More, More, more, and not even a post card when you go on vacation.   .

So, how many hours should a Federal Employee work a week on average? How many month's vacation is fair?


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eliminate the Department of Education, which educates nobody, and the Department of Energy, which creates no energy.
> 
> Better?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you
> 
> It took some time, but someone is actually identifying what to cut. At least you have some backbone.
> 
> So lets cut the Dept of Energy
> 
> 
> United States Department of Energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government concerned with the United States' policies regarding energy and safety in handling nuclear material. Its responsibilities include the nation's nuclear weapons program, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy conservation, energy-related research, radioactive waste disposal, and domestic energy production. DOE also sponsors more basic and applied scientific research than any other US federal agency; most of this is funded through its system of United States Department of Energy National Laboratories
> 
> Now all government funded energy research is gone, other countries take the lead in energy research, our nuclear program is now nonexistant, all reactors must shut down, no more nuclear weapons, the Navy must dock its carriers and subs, nuclear waste piles up.
> 
> Want to kill the Dept of Education next?
Click to expand...


You are on a roll. I think the Teachers Unions put a Contract out on you, be careful.


----------



## Revere

Government doesn't research any energy anyone wants to use.


----------



## drsmith1072

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
Click to expand...


Oh and I am sure that they can agree to cuts that they support. It's just that the left and right have different ideas on what they want to cut. 
However, for you to make blanket false statements that they won't support ANY cuts only serves to make you look like a partisan hack who ingores the facts in order to try and score political points. The fact is that the dems proposed cutting WASTE from medicare and were attacked by the right who, IF they were honest, wouldn't support medicare in the first place because it is SOCIALISM. 

As for who to blame, IF the republicans in the senate continue to filibuster and obstruct then yes they should be blamed. Whatever happened to the republicans who preached personal responsibility??


----------



## Revere

I already said to eliminate the Department of Education.  The Federal government has no place pushing local school systems around.


----------



## rightwinger

OK  Lets kill the Dept of Education now. They have 5000 employees, so they will not impact the budget much


United States Department of Education - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The primary functions of the Department of Education are to formulate and administer federal funding programs involving education, such as college financial aid, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights.[3][4]

The Department's mission is: to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.[5]

Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act). This has been left to state and local school districts. The quality of educational institutions and their degrees is maintained through an informal private process known as accreditation, over which the Department of Education has no direct public jurisdictional control.

OK...now we are talking

Federal Student Loans...gone
Scholarships to needy students...gone
Minimum standards of education....gone


But we save $56 Billion,  now where is the rest of the $1.5 trillion to come from?


----------



## Revere

drsmith1072 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of answers I would accept
> 
> - Social Security
> - Medicare
> - Iraq and Afghanistan
> - Defense Spending
> - Social Programs
> - Farm Subsidies
> - Business incentives
> - Student Loans
> 
> There are some tough cuts in there. Many people would be negatively impacted. If you are serious about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget you have to go where the money is and you will have to force sacrifices. If you want to continue the Bush tax cuts, you will need to find an additional $4 trillion in cuts
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh and I am sure that they can agree to cuts that they support. It's just that the left and right have different ideas on what they want to cut.
> However, for you to make blanket false statements that they won't support ANY cuts only serves to make you look like a partisan hack who ingores the facts in order to try and score political points. The fact is that the dems proposed cutting WASTE from medicare and were attacked by the right who, IF they were honest, wouldn't support medicare in the first place because it is SOCIALISM.
> 
> As for who to blame, IF the republicans in the senate continue to filibuster and obstruct then yes they should be blamed. Whatever happened to the republicans who preached personal responsibility??
Click to expand...


The responsible thing to do would be to filibuster all of Obma's agenda, yes.


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> Government doesn't research any energy anyone wants to use.



Nuclear, coal, waste fuels, ethanol, wind, solar....

Drill baby....drill


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> OK  Lets kill the Dept of Education now. They have 5000 employees, so they will not impact the budget much
> 
> 
> United States Department of Education - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> The primary functions of the Department of Education are to formulate and administer federal funding programs involving education, such as college financial aid, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights.[3][4]
> 
> The Department's mission is: to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.[5]
> 
> Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act). This has been left to state and local school districts. The quality of educational institutions and their degrees is maintained through an informal private process known as accreditation, over which the Department of Education has no direct public jurisdictional control.
> 
> OK...now we are talking
> 
> Federal Student Loans...gone
> Scholarships to needy students...gone
> Minimum standards of education....gone
> 
> 
> But we save $56 Billion,  now where is the rest of the $1.5 trillion to come from?



Um, all of that stuff can and did function without the federal government.


----------



## Intense

Ever notice that win or lose Dems seem to need to tell everyone else what to do, when, and how.


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> Government doesn't research any energy anyone wants to use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear, coal, waste fuels, ethanol, wind, solar....
> 
> Drill baby....drill
Click to expand...


The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.

None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.


----------



## Revere

Intense said:


> Ever notice that win or lose Dems seem to need to tell everyone else what to do, when, and how.



Yeah, and they claim you won't cut.  Once you tell them what you want to cut, they tell you it can't be cut.


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While we're at it, let's separate Bush and Obama.  The items you list were started under Bush, continued under Obama.
> 
> No, I was speaking of consumer protections in credit cards / the discontinuation of 'pre-existing condition' denial / the fact that they cannot drop your coverage when you get sick /  the fact that you can now stay on your parent's insurance until you are 25 / the fact that he saved the auto industry, which is now getting back to profitability - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that TARP has been repaid - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that 40% of the stimulus was tax-cuts / the fact that we didn't plunge into a depression /
> 
> things like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like in Follow The Yellow Brick Road? Yeah, I get it, Lion's and Tigers, and Bears, Follow The Yellow Brick Road.  When you learn to separate propaganda from reality let me know.
Click to expand...

List the propaganda.


----------



## Intense

Always on their terms, the counting isn't even complete, and we are being accused of destroying the Nation. Good Imagination, if nothing else. How do you rate the Socialist Progressive Imagination, when it comes to accusing us of shit, Revere? I give them a -10 on a  0-10 scale.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Queens has been touted as a diverse borough that is home to immigrants from all over the globe, and a key component of New York City's melting pot.
> 
> 
> But the sheer number of cultures represented by its 2.2 million residents truly sets the borough apart from the rest of the city and beyond, according to new figures released last week.
> 
> "Queens is probably one of the most diverse places on Earth," said Joseph Salvo, a well-known demographer with the city Planning Department. "There are 1 million immigrants and a mix that is perhaps unprecedented in this borough's history."
> 
> Salvo described recent borough population trends for a group of Queens officials last week with the help of a dizzying array of charts and graphs.
> 
> The foreign-born population of Queens increased 6.3% between 2000 and 2006, he said.
> 
> That population is almost equally divided among a number of Asian and Hispanic groups hailing from countries including China, Guyana, Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, India and Korea.
> 
> China tops the list, accounting for 11% of Queens' foreign-born population. That includes people from Hong Kong and Taiwan.
> 
> A look at race and origin also underscores the unique complexion of Queens, Salvo said.
> 
> 
> 
> Read more: Queens one of 'most diverse places on Earth,' new figures show



So do you have a point with this and what does it have to do with the discussion about illegals?


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some of it gets paid.
> 
> That's what I call a soft landing, compared to, say Greece.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well what is it?  You say you are going to cut spending, but can't identify what you will cut. Intense here even starts spending more.
> 
> What spending will you cut to balance the budget and pay for Bush tax cuts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, No I don't. You are a slippery rascal now aren't you. Move some of those Military Bases in high real estate areas to where they are needed. Sell that Property. Seems anytime someone does anything you don't like the sky falls in on us. Why's that?  Mean while those Government raises just keep on going and going and growing, Self Importance Syndrome. How much to cross the GWB or the Tappan Zee? More, More, more, and not even a post card when you go on vacation.   .
> 
> So, how many hours should a Federal Employee work a week on average? How many month's vacation is fair?
Click to expand...


BRAC has already happened and we are shutting down excess bases at home and abroad. We are looking to cut down our military bases not spend more money on new ones.

Tappan Zee is falling apart by the way, it will cost billions to rebuild it. More Govt spending. 

Federal employees work 40 hour weeks just like most workers. Vacation is between 2 1/2 and 5 weeks depending on service.


----------



## Revere

There won't be a nuclear power plant online as long as there is a Democrat President or in any blue state ever.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!  He's already made America better.
> 
> Let's see wingnuts take away those improvements.  I dare them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
Click to expand...


Well if you want to separate the hype then this would be the total content of your own post.

"How is that? How about we separate the hype"

So, do you even bother following your own advice?? LOL


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well what is it?  You say you are going to cut spending, but can't identify what you will cut. Intense here even starts spending more.
> 
> What spending will you cut to balance the budget and pay for Bush tax cuts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, No I don't. You are a slippery rascal now aren't you. Move some of those Military Bases in high real estate areas to where they are needed. Sell that Property. Seems anytime someone does anything you don't like the sky falls in on us. Why's that?  Mean while those Government raises just keep on going and going and growing, Self Importance Syndrome. How much to cross the GWB or the Tappan Zee? More, More, more, and not even a post card when you go on vacation.   .
> 
> So, how many hours should a Federal Employee work a week on average? How many month's vacation is fair?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BRAC has already happened and we are shutting down excess bases at home and abroad. We are looking to cut down our military bases not spend more money on new ones.
> 
> Tappan Zee is falling apart by the way, it will cost billions to rebuild it. More Govt spending.
> 
> Federal employees work 40 hour weeks just like most workers. Vacation is between 2 1/2 and 5 weeks depending on service.
Click to expand...


But the pension and benefit packages are obscene.


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> While we're at it, let's separate Bush and Obama.  The items you list were started under Bush, continued under Obama.
> 
> No, I was speaking of consumer protections in credit cards / the discontinuation of 'pre-existing condition' denial / the fact that they cannot drop your coverage when you get sick /  the fact that you can now stay on your parent's insurance until you are 25 / the fact that he saved the auto industry, which is now getting back to profitability - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that TARP has been repaid - and made money for the taxpayers / the fact that 40% of the stimulus was tax-cuts / the fact that we didn't plunge into a depression /
> 
> things like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like in Follow The Yellow Brick Road? Yeah, I get it, Lion's and Tigers, and Bears, Follow The Yellow Brick Road.  When you learn to separate propaganda from reality let me know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> List the propaganda.
Click to expand...


The Uptake: Senator Al Franken at Dayton Rally | Al Franken - U.S. Senator, Minnesota


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> Government doesn't research any energy anyone wants to use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear, coal, waste fuels, ethanol, wind, solar....
> 
> Drill baby....drill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.
> 
> None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.
Click to expand...


Drill baby...... drill






We don't need Energy Research!


----------



## HUGGY

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



It's gonna be a clusterfuck.  The TeaBaggers didn't come up through the ranks of the GOP and hold no alleigence to the Orange Boner.  It's the third or fourth transformation of the GOP and the incumbants aren't going to like the independance of the TeaBaggers.  No more lock step..no more no.  I don't know for sure but I suspect there will be a lot more compromise than some might think because the new house majority isn't a majority of the kind that Bush enjoyed in his first term.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear, coal, waste fuels, ethanol, wind, solar....
> 
> Drill baby....drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.
> 
> None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
Click to expand...


Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.
> 
> None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.
Click to expand...


China now has the lead in Solar technologies manufacture and research

Drill....Baby...Drill


----------



## Intense

Revere said:


> There won't be a nuclear power plant online as long as there is a Democrat President or in any blue state ever.



My problem with Nuclear Power is the proximity to densely populated areas, and quality control. They need to be remote. I would support reprocessing, rather than stockpiling fuel too. I used to protest them. Location is a key factor. I love Hydro Power. It can be improved. but it still isn't enough.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> I 'd agree. I'd put some bases near our borders too. The answer needs to be focused on necessity, not convenience, not even livelihood, unless you want to pay my taxes and bills for me.  I mean feel free.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry,
> Bases cost money to build. We are supposed to be cutting spending
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Border Integrity is a Responsibility, of the Federal Government, National Security takes priority to your or my feelings. Border Security is a Fail for how long now?
Click to expand...


Really?? Does it say that "Border Integrity is a Responsibility" in the consititution and if so where??


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China now has the lead in Solar technologies manufacture and research
> 
> Drill....Baby...Drill
Click to expand...



Yep, there will be more of that too. China bas a big base to support, and State enterprise, is adapting allot of the principles we are abandoning, only for them, It's State Capitalism.


----------



## mudwhistle

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



You Democrats handed them the worst economy since the Great Depression. You Democrats drove this fucker into the ditch...now you want them to fix everything you assholes broke over-night? 

Unlike you Democrats the GOP isn't into making promises they can't and never wanted to keep. It's gonna take a long time to undo the damage that has been done....so don't expect miracles. I know as a Dem you tend to do that.


----------



## drsmith1072

Revere said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree -- it's not going to be easy.  But the House and Senate Dems and Obama aren't going to agree to any spending cuts.
> 
> When the deficit continues to increase, though, you'll blame the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and I am sure that they can agree to cuts that they support. It's just that the left and right have different ideas on what they want to cut.
> However, for you to make blanket false statements that they won't support ANY cuts only serves to make you look like a partisan hack who ingores the facts in order to try and score political points. The fact is that the dems proposed cutting WASTE from medicare and were attacked by the right who, IF they were honest, wouldn't support medicare in the first place because it is SOCIALISM.
> 
> As for who to blame, IF the republicans in the senate continue to filibuster and obstruct then yes they should be blamed. Whatever happened to the republicans who preached personal responsibility??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The responsible thing to do would be to filibuster all of Obma's agenda, yes.
Click to expand...


LOL So doing NOTHING is the responsibile thing to "do?" LOL The sad thing is that republicans were so into saying NO that they said no to things that they supported just to try and make sure that obama looked like he wasn't getting anything accomplished and you actually think that's postive and responsibile? LOL WOW!

Oh and thanks for the laughs and your bumper sticker propaganda. Is that all you were spoon fed today or do you have anything else to regurgitate? LOL


----------



## Revere

drsmith1072 said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and I am sure that they can agree to cuts that they support. It's just that the left and right have different ideas on what they want to cut.
> However, for you to make blanket false statements that they won't support ANY cuts only serves to make you look like a partisan hack who ingores the facts in order to try and score political points. The fact is that the dems proposed cutting WASTE from medicare and were attacked by the right who, IF they were honest, wouldn't support medicare in the first place because it is SOCIALISM.
> 
> As for who to blame, IF the republicans in the senate continue to filibuster and obstruct then yes they should be blamed. Whatever happened to the republicans who preached personal responsibility??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The responsible thing to do would be to filibuster all of Obma's agenda, yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL So doing NOTHING is the responsibile thing to "do?" LOL The sad thing is that republicans were so into saying NO that they said no to things that they supported just to try and make sure that obama looked like he wasn't getting anything accomplished and you actually think that's postive and responsibile? LOL WOW!
> 
> Oh and thanks for the laughs and your bumper sticker propaganda. Is that all you were spoon fed today or do you have anything else to regurgitate? LOL
Click to expand...


Pass pro-growth legislation and let Obama veto it, yes.

Republicans were not put back in power to be less of the same Obamanistas.


----------



## Intense

In the Spirit of Federalism, I'm really looking forward to seeing what the States come up with.


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny the way  you pretend there's any answer you'll accept.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the point Dave, there is no answer.  The "Answer" is that without tax increases, we will be running a deficit for quite some time.
> 
> We don't claim to have "The Answer," just pointing out that the tea-crowd doesn't.  They nonchalantly say "Cut Taxes! Balance the budget!" but it's clearly not that simple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's got a better chance of succeeding than "Keep spending money that doesn't even exist!"
> 
> The left complained about the deficit...when Bush was in office.  With Obama in, not a peep from them.
Click to expand...


That ain't true, many of us are concerned about the deficit, myself included.  Just pointing out that saying "Balance the budget!" doesn't make it so.  Every cut you make has consequences, unemployment in particular - A government job is a job nonetheless. Take it away - Whether it's a soldier or a bureaucrat or an astronaut - and that person will be cast into a flooded labor pool.  Further economic instability will result.  Sorry, that's just the way it is.

FYI replace "Left" with "Right" and flip-flop Bush with Obama in your statement, and it's at least equally true... Just sayin.  

And no, "Cut Taxes! Balance the Budget!" is not as relevant as continuing deficit spending (Which is suggested virtually universally by economists).  In fact, it's such a logical disconnect I can't even think of a suitable analogy.  It's like thinking a hand job will clean your garage.







....OK I stole that last part from Maher.  But the rest is mine.


----------



## drsmith1072

Intense said:


> Ever notice that win or lose Dems seem to need to tell everyone else what to do, when, and how.



Ever notice how WHEN you are losing you need to make up shite in a lame attempt to smear others for disagreeing with your ubsubstantiated spin?? 

BTW weren't you the one that tried to tell me how I define the word "contradiction?" 

So it would appear that YOU seem to need to tell everyone else what to do, when, and how.

I have a serious question. Do you even bother paying attention to what you say and how it flies in the face of what you have said previously BEFORE you open your mouth and insert your foot??


----------



## HUGGY

mudwhistle said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You Democrats handed them the worst economy since the Great Depression. You Democrats drove this fucker into the ditch...now you want them to fix everything you assholes broke over-night?
> 
> Unlike you Democrats the GOP isn't into making promises they can't and never wanted to keep. It's gonna take a long time to undo the damage that has been done....so don't expect miracles. I know as a Dem you tend to do that.
Click to expand...


So you are saying right up front that the election was a waste of time and money..because the NeoGOPers you just placed in office do not intend to correct the problems that pissed of the public and got them elected.  Honesty from the PudWhistler...how refreshing!


----------



## drsmith1072

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, No I don't. You are a slippery rascal now aren't you. Move some of those Military Bases in high real estate areas to where they are needed. Sell that Property. Seems anytime someone does anything you don't like the sky falls in on us. Why's that?  Mean while those Government raises just keep on going and going and growing, Self Importance Syndrome. How much to cross the GWB or the Tappan Zee? More, More, more, and not even a post card when you go on vacation.   .
> 
> So, how many hours should a Federal Employee work a week on average? How many month's vacation is fair?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BRAC has already happened and we are shutting down excess bases at home and abroad. We are looking to cut down our military bases not spend more money on new ones.
> 
> Tappan Zee is falling apart by the way, it will cost billions to rebuild it. More Govt spending.
> 
> Federal employees work 40 hour weeks just like most workers. Vacation is between 2 1/2 and 5 weeks depending on service.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But the pension and benefit packages are obscene.
Click to expand...


My father is a newly retired postal worker and his retirement is hardly what anyone would call obscene. So do you have any SPECIFICS or are you just like the rest of the hacks who only make vague generalities and believe that's good enough??


----------



## mudwhistle

drsmith1072 said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and I am sure that they can agree to cuts that they support. It's just that the left and right have different ideas on what they want to cut.
> However, for you to make blanket false statements that they won't support ANY cuts only serves to make you look like a partisan hack who ingores the facts in order to try and score political points. The fact is that the dems proposed cutting WASTE from medicare and were attacked by the right who, IF they were honest, wouldn't support medicare in the first place because it is SOCIALISM.
> 
> As for who to blame, IF the republicans in the senate continue to filibuster and obstruct then yes they should be blamed. Whatever happened to the republicans who preached personal responsibility??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The responsible thing to do would be to filibuster all of Obma's agenda, yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL So doing NOTHING is the responsibile thing to "do?" LOL The sad thing is that republicans were so into saying NO that they said no to things that they supported just to try and make sure that obama looked like he wasn't getting anything accomplished and you actually think that's postive and responsibile? LOL WOW!
> 
> Oh and thanks for the laughs and your bumper sticker propaganda. Is that all you were spoon fed today or do you have anything else to regurgitate? LOL
Click to expand...


Hate to tell you this but what would help the economy the most is for them to do nothing about it. After all their primary job is to protect this nation and maintain the infrastructure needed for interstate commerce. Maybe they could give themselves term limits while they're taking a break from their socialistic ways.

Oh....I also think it would be a good idea to make sure the Conservative SC Justices are safe. Make sure Obama doesn't have a chance to replace any of them. Obama is gonna be using other methods other then Legislation to put his new government in place.


----------



## drsmith1072

Revere said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> The responsible thing to do would be to filibuster all of Obma's agenda, yes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL So doing NOTHING is the responsibile thing to "do?" LOL The sad thing is that republicans were so into saying NO that they said no to things that they supported just to try and make sure that obama looked like he wasn't getting anything accomplished and you actually think that's postive and responsibile? LOL WOW!
> 
> Oh and thanks for the laughs and your bumper sticker propaganda. Is that all you were spoon fed today or do you have anything else to regurgitate? LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pass pro-growth legislation and let Obama veto it, yes.
> 
> Republicans were not put back in power to be less of the same Obamanistas.
Click to expand...


What does your response have to do with my post?? Why even bother responding to a post if you are going to turn tail and run away form the content?? thanks for shwoing that you have no REAL arguments to offer and can only regurgitate rightwing talking points.

BTW in case you missed it, the dems tried passing pro-growth legislation and were blocked by the very republicans you kneel before and blindly worship.


----------



## mudwhistle

HUGGY said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You Democrats handed them the worst economy since the Great Depression. You Democrats drove this fucker into the ditch...now you want them to fix everything you assholes broke over-night?
> 
> Unlike you Democrats the GOP isn't into making promises they can't and never wanted to keep. It's gonna take a long time to undo the damage that has been done....so don't expect miracles. I know as a Dem you tend to do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you are saying right up front that the election was a waste of time and money..because the NeoGOPers you just placed in office do not intend to correct the problems that pissed of the public and got them elected.  Honesty from the PudWhistler...how refreshing!
Click to expand...


What they can do is bring the spending to a halt. Next they can work on extending the current tax structure. Those two alone will get the economy rolling.

Oh....just fyi.....the Administration is doing something incredibly stupid today. They began easing the debt by printing $600 billion in cash and buying all those US Treasuries back.

 The Obama Administration just gave you a nice pay cut the day after the election.

I guess he's just punishing his enemies like he said would.


----------



## Cuyo

mudwhistle said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> You Democrats handed them the worst economy since the Great Depression. You Democrats drove this fucker into the ditch...now you want them to fix everything you assholes broke over-night?
> 
> Unlike you Democrats the GOP isn't into making promises they can't and never wanted to keep. It's gonna take a long time to undo the damage that has been done....so don't expect miracles. I know as a Dem you tend to do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are saying right up front that the election was a waste of time and money..because the NeoGOPers you just placed in office do not intend to correct the problems that pissed of the public and got them elected.  Honesty from the PudWhistler...how refreshing!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What they can do is bring the spending to a halt. Next they can work on extending the current tax structure. Those two alone will get the economy rolling.
Click to expand...


Which spending?  Military?  Infrastructure?  Please tell me, which spending?


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like in Follow The Yellow Brick Road? Yeah, I get it, Lion's and Tigers, and Bears, Follow The Yellow Brick Road.  When you learn to separate propaganda from reality let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> List the propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Uptake: Senator Al Franken at Dayton Rally | Al Franken - U.S. Senator, Minnesota
Click to expand...

You're a lazy debater.  Or you just don't know how to debate.

You claimed that the accomplishments I listed were propaganda.  List which accomplishment is propaganda, and why.

Use your own words.  Don't just post a link.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> But They Can Challenge Jurisdiction and Constitutional Application, and what it really say's as opposed to what we think it says. The Key here is Due Process and The Rule of Law.


Of course they can..which is why there are ways to do so. Doesn't mean they are right or even have the standing.


Intense said:


> Constitutional Interpretation, as it stands now, is only what a standing Supreme Court say's it is, that can sadly be subject to arbitrary rulings and translations, which can be just as arbitrarily reversed. That is where the Amendment Process comes in. There is No Law more Powerful. The States can have a very important role in that. Personally, I would love to see the abomination of what was done to the "Commerce Claus", addressed. Again, Power gone wild.


Well yes..but I disagree with your example. 



Intense said:


> Back on point. You are grossly misinformed. The Federal Government has It's Jurisdiction, The States have Their Jurisdiction. You forget that. Living in the present, understand that there is immense power there. The Obama Administration is going to learn that the hard way, if it continues to deal with Arizona underhandedly.



Not misinformed at all. The Federal government's jurisdiction is over the states. Obama is on solid legal ground in challenging Arizona's immigration law. Immigration falls under the powers of Congress not the states.


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.
> 
> None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.
Click to expand...


There is no "our own oil".  Even when it comes from America's ground.  All oil goes on the world market.  That's just a fact.

It's frustrating to try to discuss politics with people who don't understand the issues.


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no "our own oil".  Even when it comes from America's ground.  All oil goes on the world market.  That's just a fact.
> 
> It's frustrating to try to discuss politics with people who don't understand the issues.
Click to expand...


LOL! Good one. It's still our oil, or you are implying that anyone can just show up and claim it, just drill where and when they want? Someone or some entity owns it from the instant it comes out of the ground. Some people don't understand anything huh, like the connection with surplus and worth. How about the refineries, the relationship there with reserve and price, all of the different rules governing refinement. It's wasteful.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you are saying right up front that the election was a waste of time and money..because the NeoGOPers you just placed in office do not intend to correct the problems that pissed of the public and got them elected.  Honesty from the PudWhistler...how refreshing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What they can do is bring the spending to a halt. Next they can work on extending the current tax structure. Those two alone will get the economy rolling.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which spending?  Military?  Infrastructure?  Please tell me, which spending?
Click to expand...


Well at least you got your talking points in step. Nobody can govern responsibly but Your side of the aisle, I get it. Nobody can make a cut but you. If you really want to know the answer to your question hire me. I'll make your problems go away, surer than shit.


----------



## Cuyo

Intense said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> What they can do is bring the spending to a halt. Next they can work on extending the current tax structure. Those two alone will get the economy rolling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which spending?  Military?  Infrastructure?  Please tell me, which spending?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well at least you got your talking points in step. Nobody can govern responsibly but Your side of the aisle, I get it. Nobody can make a cut but you. If you really want to know the answer to your question hire me. I'll make your problems go away, surer than shit.
Click to expand...


Answer the question.  Which spending?  I never claimed to have the answer.  I'm just pointing out that your bumper stickers ain't it.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not just the Dems that have their favorite programs. Are fly over states going to agree with cuts to farm subsides? Will repubs agree to cutting corporate welfare programs? If you have a major defense contractor in your district, will you agree if that contract gets cut?
> 
> If we end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan we have tens of thousands of soldiers returning to no jobs. Cut education funding and thousands of students drop out of school.
> 
> It is much more than cutting government waste. What you consider to be waste is someone else's livelyhood
> 
> 
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
Click to expand...

The National Endowment for the Arts.  If an artist can't get people to buy his art voluntarily, he probably shouldn't be an artist.

The Department of Education.  Its functions should be returned to state and local government where they belong.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development.  Ever see a housing project?  Do you think they're doing a good job?  I don't.  

Amtrak.  If it can't operate on revenues generated by ridership, it needs to be turned over to private enterprise, who can make it work.

All farm subsidies.  It's obscene that people are paid to not farm.  

As for finding work for the displaced bureaucrats, the government is not a jobs program.


----------



## daveman

Synthaholic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is that? By abandoning Due Process? Rule of Law? By indebting us many times over the worst that Bush did? How about we separate the hype.
> 
> 
> 
> Impossible with Synth.  All he has is "Obama is _ever_ so dreamy!!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He's got a great 3-point shot, ya gotta admit.
Click to expand...

You really think anybody's going to block him and draw an audit?


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The National Endowment for the Arts.  If an artist can't get people to buy his art voluntarily, he probably shouldn't be an artist.
> 
> The Department of Education.  Its functions should be returned to state and local government where they belong.
> 
> The Department of Housing and Urban Development.  Ever see a housing project?  Do you think they're doing a good job?  I don't.
> 
> Amtrak.  If it can't operate on revenues generated by ridership, it needs to be turned over to private enterprise, who can make it work.
> 
> All farm subsidies.  It's obscene that people are paid to not farm.
> 
> As for finding work for the displaced bureaucrats, the government is not a jobs program.
Click to expand...


How do you think you did?  Is that $1.3 trillion worth?  Do we have our balanced budget?

And I know the government is not supposed to be a jobs program, but it doesn't change the fact that unemployment would rise and we'd all suffer as a consequence...


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> List the propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Uptake: Senator Al Franken at Dayton Rally | Al Franken - U.S. Senator, Minnesota
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're a lazy debater.  Or you just don't know how to debate.
> 
> You claimed that the accomplishments I listed were propaganda.  List which accomplishment is propaganda, and why.
> 
> Use your own words.  Don't just post a link.
Click to expand...


Fail, I questioned your ability to separate propaganda from reality. You presumed I was limited to what was on your list. Who profits on all of the Credit Card loans along with the bank? Who is the Banks silent partner? Who benefits when you get insurance coverage but your claim or procedure is denied. Do you really believe that the Government just mandates stuff in your interest and it's done. Think smoke screen, or bait and switch. Government pretty much gets funded or profits on every side of the equation, every time money changes hands, fast or slow. So it really isn't about the money, but about the control. Tell me, when you shop, do you wait for the sales to end? No You purchase when it is more to your advantage not less. The same holds for business spending, both business and Government profit from both volume and keeping the lines of supply running, government getting a cut in one form or another, every step of the way. Yet, it is never enough, and Government workers are never over paid, no matter whether their job is relevant or not. School Tuitions. How much do you think those tuitions would drop if there was a 50% drop in enrollment? What's the interest on that Federal Student loan? Does the Fed risk that you won't pay, like a financial Institution? No, they will track you to your grave? How come the interest on your student loan is not greed? It is Profit,  right? Why is the interest so high. Hmmmm...... Socialism is not compatible with Federalism. That is what I have against your reasoning. Everything of value has to come from someone or something. Somebody paid the true cost.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> But They Can Challenge Jurisdiction and Constitutional Application, and what it really say's as opposed to what we think it says. The Key here is Due Process and The Rule of Law.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they can..which is why there are ways to do so. Doesn't mean they are right or even have the standing.
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Constitutional Interpretation, as it stands now, is only what a standing Supreme Court say's it is, that can sadly be subject to arbitrary rulings and translations, which can be just as arbitrarily reversed. That is where the Amendment Process comes in. There is No Law more Powerful. The States can have a very important role in that. Personally, I would love to see the abomination of what was done to the "Commerce Claus", addressed. Again, Power gone wild.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well yes..but I disagree with your example.
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Back on point. You are grossly misinformed. The Federal Government has It's Jurisdiction, The States have Their Jurisdiction. You forget that. Living in the present, understand that there is immense power there. The Obama Administration is going to learn that the hard way, if it continues to deal with Arizona underhandedly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not misinformed at all. The Federal government's jurisdiction is over the states. Obama is on solid legal ground in challenging Arizona's immigration law. Immigration falls under the powers of Congress not the states.
Click to expand...


You are free to disagree with my example, as much hardship as it causes, there are views on both sides. The Federal Government does not have jurisdiction of everything regarding the States. They never had that. The term Enumerated Powers, though damaged from the start, does restrict Federal Jurisdiction, authority, and recourse. The Fed is not All Powerful even though at times it may think so. You Implied that the States have no right or ability to challenge the Fed. That is flawed. The Fed has also acted poorly with Arizona on multiple fronts. Don't expect the Various Governors around the country to not take note.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> In the Spirit of Federalism, I'm really looking forward to seeing what the States come up with.



The States have no money. They are in worse shape than the Federal Government


----------



## rightwinger

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Outside of Constitutional mandates, if a job can't survive in the private sector, it's probably not necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you be specific and say who and what you would cut?  It would also help if you said what would happen with the people affected by your cuts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The National Endowment for the Arts.  If an artist can't get people to buy his art voluntarily, he probably shouldn't be an artist.
> 
> The Department of Education.  Its functions should be returned to state and local government where they belong.
> 
> The Department of Housing and Urban Development.  Ever see a housing project?  Do you think they're doing a good job?  I don't.
> 
> Amtrak.  If it can't operate on revenues generated by ridership, it needs to be turned over to private enterprise, who can make it work.
> 
> All farm subsidies.  It's obscene that people are paid to not farm.
> 
> As for finding work for the displaced bureaucrats, the government is not a jobs program.
Click to expand...


Thanks Dave....you seem more capable of specifics than the Tea Party

NEA is literally pennies. Not worth the bandwidth in a serious discussion of cutting spending
Deptartment of Education could be reduced to a shell (it has 5000 employees now) and its funtions allocated to the states. This saves no money. It only shifts it to the states
HUD does more than housing projects and all its functions would have to be shifted to the state level. Taking money out of my right pocket instead of my left
Private enterprise can't save Amtrak, all they want is the Boston-NY-Washington run. Congress forced unprofitable runs through Red States which lose money. 
Farm subsidies- cut them

You still don't have $1.3 Trillion in cuts yet, you are still about $1 trillion short. You have killed the programs liberals like, now you will hae to go after some conservative programs.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> You are free to disagree with my example, as much hardship as it causes, there are views on both sides. The Federal Government does not have jurisdiction of everything regarding the States. They never had that. The term Enumerated Powers, though damaged from the start, does restrict Federal Jurisdiction, authority, and recourse. The Fed is not All Powerful even though at times it may think so. You Implied that the States have no right or ability to challenge the Fed. That is flawed. The Fed has also acted poorly with Arizona on multiple fronts. Don't expect the Various Governors around the country to not take note.



I never implied that states do not have the power to challenge the federal government. And this whole "limited government" argument is one I find specious coming from conservatives. They seem to have no trouble with a centrally controlled military that invades other countries despite the fact there is no real reason to do so. They seem to have no trouble with a government that spies on it's own citizens, suspends rights, or tortures people. They also have no problem with corporate entities being looked upon as citizens with limited liability in a court of law. But somehow..if the government is actually doing something like Health care..which does fall under promotion of commerce and general welfare..then it's infringing on "states rights". That's a little on the crazy side.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear, coal, waste fuels, ethanol, wind, solar....
> 
> Drill baby....drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Feds aren't doing anything with fossil fuels except pushing away from them.
> 
> None of that other stuff is viable for an advanced nation of 300,000,000 people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Drill baby...... drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We don't need Energy Research!
Click to expand...


I know, they should get a room. Research is good. Balance is better.


----------



## Intense

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Federalism is what The Constitution Establishes. We are a Federal Republic. The Civil War did not take away the Federal Republic. It did not cease to be because of the failed succession of the South. What is with you? What about Representative Government scares you so much?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing.
> 
> What scares you about it? The Constitution establishes representative government. The congress passes legislation that must be followed by the states. The states are granted a certain amount of autonomy to deal with regional affairs. For example, prostitution is legal in Nevada..but not in New York.
> 
> *But states can't start challenging Constitutional supremacy. That's in there as well.
> *
> Why does that scare you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But They Can Challenge Jurisdiction and Constitutional Application, and what it really say's as opposed to what we think it says. The Key here is Due Process and The Rule of Law. Constitutional Interpretation, as it stands now, is only what a standing Supreme Court say's it is, that can sadly be subject to arbitrary rulings and translations, which can be just as arbitrarily reversed. That is where the Amendment Process comes in. There is No Law more Powerful. The States can have a very important role in that. Personally, I would love to see the abomination of what was done to the "Commerce Claus", addressed. Again, Power gone wild. Back on point. You are grossly misinformed. The Federal Government has It's Jurisdiction, The States have Their Jurisdiction. You forget that. Living in the present, understand that there is immense power there. The Obama Administration is going to learn that the hard way, if it continues to deal with Arizona underhandedly.
Click to expand...


There is what you said, I'll give it a pass because I know what you meant. Just remember that using due process and reform, there are no guarantees. That is not always good, so we all really need to be vigilant and be careful about what we ask for.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are free to disagree with my example, as much hardship as it causes, there are views on both sides. The Federal Government does not have jurisdiction of everything regarding the States. They never had that. The term Enumerated Powers, though damaged from the start, does restrict Federal Jurisdiction, authority, and recourse. The Fed is not All Powerful even though at times it may think so. You Implied that the States have no right or ability to challenge the Fed. That is flawed. The Fed has also acted poorly with Arizona on multiple fronts. Don't expect the Various Governors around the country to not take note.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never implied that states do not have the power to challenge the federal government. And this whole "limited government" argument is one I find specious coming from conservatives. They seem to have no trouble with a centrally controlled military that invades other countries despite the fact there is no real reason to do so. They seem to have no trouble with a government that spies on it's own citizens, suspends rights, or tortures people. They also have no problem with corporate entities being looked upon as citizens with limited liability in a court of law. But somehow..if the government is actually doing something like Health care..which does fall under promotion of commerce and general welfare..then it's infringing on "states rights". That's a little on the crazy side.
Click to expand...


actually there are major Strategic Advantages to a coordinated Military. Still different units play by different rules. I really support the Idea of a strong National Guard, that is controlled by the consent of the Governors, on loan to the President. I bet the Indian Tribes that are no more would have better appreciated National Guard Troops minding their own business What do you think? Then again I really appreciate how our Military responds to Natural Disasters around the world. There is no PR that can compare to that. Being in the right place at the right time, making the difference. When the Fed goes against one or a few States, it may take the day. When the Fed pisses off 66% to 75% of the States, it will lose.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> How do you think you did?  Is that $1.3 trillion worth?  Do we have our balanced budget?


Oh, no.  That was just a start.


Cuyo said:


> And I know the government is not supposed to be a jobs program, but it doesn't change the fact that unemployment would rise and we'd all suffer as a consequence...


So you're not willing to decrease the size of the government.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> Thanks Dave....you seem more capable of specifics than the Tea Party


Have you really listened to the Tea Party, or are you relying on what you've been told?


rightwinger said:


> NEA is literally pennies. Not worth the bandwidth in a serious discussion of cutting spending
> Deptartment of Education could be reduced to a shell (it has 5000 employees now) and its funtions allocated to the states. This saves no money. It only shifts it to the states
> HUD does more than housing projects and all its functions would have to be shifted to the state level. Taking money out of my right pocket instead of my left
> Private enterprise can't save Amtrak, all they want is the Boston-NY-Washington run. Congress forced unprofitable runs through Red States which lose money.
> Farm subsidies- cut them
> 
> You still don't have $1.3 Trillion in cuts yet, you are still about $1 trillion short. You have killed the programs liberals like, now you will hae to go after some conservative programs.


That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.

But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.

I may not cut as much from Defense as the Left would like, however, because most bases have serious infrastructure issues.  When I was at Kunsan AB in ROK 13 years ago, they were still finding wooden water mains in service that the Japanese had installed during their occupation.  

I could see reducing our overseas bases in Europe.  Russia's not likely to attack our allies.


----------



## Intense

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Dave....you seem more capable of specifics than the Tea Party
> 
> 
> 
> Have you really listened to the Tea Party, or are you relying on what you've been told?
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> NEA is literally pennies. Not worth the bandwidth in a serious discussion of cutting spending
> Deptartment of Education could be reduced to a shell (it has 5000 employees now) and its funtions allocated to the states. This saves no money. It only shifts it to the states
> HUD does more than housing projects and all its functions would have to be shifted to the state level. Taking money out of my right pocket instead of my left
> Private enterprise can't save Amtrak, all they want is the Boston-NY-Washington run. Congress forced unprofitable runs through Red States which lose money.
> Farm subsidies- cut them
> 
> You still don't have $1.3 Trillion in cuts yet, you are still about $1 trillion short. You have killed the programs liberals like, now you will hae to go after some conservative programs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.
> 
> I may not cut as much from Defense as the Left would like, however, because most bases have serious infrastructure issues.  When I was at Kunsan AB in ROK 13 years ago, they were still finding wooden water mains in service that the Japanese had installed during their occupation.
> 
> I could see reducing our overseas bases in Europe.  Russia's not likely to attack our allies.
Click to expand...


I have a thought on that. I say let the Military use DOD Personnel, on the gun ranges, when they are really really bad, the Military gets to use live ammo. Keep the Bureaucrat's in shape, on their toes, and really, really, agreeable. Cut down on Weenies real quick.


----------



## rightwinger

daveman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Dave....you seem more capable of specifics than the Tea Party
> 
> 
> 
> Have you really listened to the Tea Party, or are you relying on what you've been told?
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> NEA is literally pennies. Not worth the bandwidth in a serious discussion of cutting spending
> Deptartment of Education could be reduced to a shell (it has 5000 employees now) and its funtions allocated to the states. This saves no money. It only shifts it to the states
> HUD does more than housing projects and all its functions would have to be shifted to the state level. Taking money out of my right pocket instead of my left
> Private enterprise can't save Amtrak, all they want is the Boston-NY-Washington run. Congress forced unprofitable runs through Red States which lose money.
> Farm subsidies- cut them
> 
> You still don't have $1.3 Trillion in cuts yet, you are still about $1 trillion short. You have killed the programs liberals like, now you will hae to go after some conservative programs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.
> 
> I may not cut as much from Defense as the Left would like, however, because most bases have serious infrastructure issues.  When I was at Kunsan AB in ROK 13 years ago, they were still finding wooden water mains in service that the Japanese had installed during their occupation.
> 
> I could see reducing our overseas bases in Europe.  Russia's not likely to attack our allies.
Click to expand...


Additional cuts in the military can come from expecting the EU and Japan to assume more responsibility for their own defense. Restructure our nuclear strategic mission. Do we really need 1500 warheads and the subs, air bases and aircraft to deliver them? Cut the number of Aircraft carrier task forces. Get the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq

That is $1 trillion right there


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Dave....you seem more capable of specifics than the Tea Party
> 
> 
> 
> Have you really listened to the Tea Party, or are you relying on what you've been told?
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> NEA is literally pennies. Not worth the bandwidth in a serious discussion of cutting spending
> Deptartment of Education could be reduced to a shell (it has 5000 employees now) and its funtions allocated to the states. This saves no money. It only shifts it to the states
> HUD does more than housing projects and all its functions would have to be shifted to the state level. Taking money out of my right pocket instead of my left
> Private enterprise can't save Amtrak, all they want is the Boston-NY-Washington run. Congress forced unprofitable runs through Red States which lose money.
> Farm subsidies- cut them
> 
> You still don't have $1.3 Trillion in cuts yet, you are still about $1 trillion short. You have killed the programs liberals like, now you will hae to go after some conservative programs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.
> 
> I may not cut as much from Defense as the Left would like, however, because most bases have serious infrastructure issues.  When I was at Kunsan AB in ROK 13 years ago, they were still finding wooden water mains in service that the Japanese had installed during their occupation.
> 
> I could see reducing our overseas bases in Europe.  Russia's not likely to attack our allies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Additional cuts in the military can come from expecting the EU and Japan to assume more responsibility for their own defense. Restructure our nuclear strategic mission. Do we really need 1500 warheads and the subs, air bases and aircraft to deliver them? Cut the number of Aircraft carrier task forces. Get the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq
> 
> That is $1 trillion right there
Click to expand...

Don't know as I'd cut the carriers.  Nothing says "You all settle down and play nice" like a carrier battle group on the horizon.  

I'm not willing to leave Iraq and Afghanistan until they're spun up and can take care of their own security, but the rest is certainly on the table.


----------



## Zander

Well liberals, here is a way to cut $343 BILLION from the next budget.  



From the Heritage Foundation -
Table 1: Spending Cuts for FY 2012

(in millions of dollars)

Agriculture

$15,000
 Replace farm subsidies with Farmer Savings Accounts and improved crop insurance.

$2,033
 Eliminate the Foreign Agriculture Service.

$1,500
 Merge all four agriculture outreach and research agencies and cut their budget in half.

$1,000
 Fund the Food Safety and Inspection Service with user fees.

Commerce

$500
 Eliminate business subsidies from the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Community Development

$6,000
 Eliminate the Community Development Block Grant program.

$598
 Eliminate the Rural Utilities Service.

$523
 Eliminate the Economic Development Administration.

$480
 Eliminate NeighborWorks America (formerly the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation).

$200
 Consolidate the Rural Housing and Development Programs and convert them into block grants.

$73
 Eliminate the Appalachian Regional Commission.

$48
 Eliminate the Denali Commission.

$31
 Eliminate the Minority Development Business Agency.

$8
 Eliminate the Delta Regional Authority.

Education

$8,000
 Return Pell Grants to their 2009 funding level of $24 billion, which is still double the 2007 level.

$2,000
 Trim Head Start by $2 billion and convert it into vouchers.

$2,000
 Scale back the Education Department bureaucracy.

$1,500
 Eliminate dozens of small and duplicative education grants.

$298
 Eliminate state grants for Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities.

Energy and the Environment

$6,500
 Reduce energy subsidies for commercialization and some research activities.

$600
 Block grant and devolve Environmental Protection Agency grant programs.

$200
 Restructure the Power Marketing Administrations to charge market-based rates.

$63
 Eliminate the Science to Achieve Results Program.

Government Reform

$44,000
 Halve federal program payment errors by 2012, especially by reducing Medicare errors and earned income tax credit errors.
Tighten oversight by spending $5 billion on new resources, such as updated computer systems, and then recover $49 billion in payment errors.

$20,000
 Rescind unobligated balances after 36 months.

$12,500
 Halve the $25 billion spent to maintain vacant federal properties.

$10,000
 Cut the federal employee travel budget to $4 billion (half of FY 2000 spending).

$3,000
 Freeze federal pay until it can be reformed.

$1,000
 Suspend acquisition of federal office space.

$600
 Trim the federal vehicle fleet by 20 percent (a reduction of 100,000 vehicles).

$300
 Cut the House and Senate budgets back to the 2008 level of $2.2 billion.

$215
 Eliminate the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.

$100
 Tighten controls on federal employee credit cards and cut down on delinquencies.

$70
 Require federal employees to fly coach on domestic flights.

Health Care

$6,200
 Reform Medigap.

$5,000
 Repeal Obamacare (larger savings in later years).

$3,700
 Require Medicare home health co-payments.

$673
 Eliminate the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant.

$414
 Eliminate Health Professions grants.

$327
 Eliminate Title X Family Planning.

$150
 Eliminate the National Health Service Corps.

$98
 Repeal Rural Health Outreach and Flexibility grants.

Homeland Security

$2,700
 Eliminate most homeland security grants to states and allow states to finance their own programs.

Income Security

$500
 Better enforce eligibility requirements for food stamps.

Interior



$1,500
 Open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to leasing.
(The savings are leasing revenues, which are classified as negative spending in the federal budget.)

$200
 Suspend federal land purchases.

International

$2,636
 Eliminate the Development Assistance Program. 

$625
 Eliminate the State Department&#8217;s education and cultural exchange programs.

$321
 Eliminate the International Trade Administration&#8217;s trade promotion activities or charge the beneficiaries.

$183
 Eliminate the Democracy Fund.

$68
 Eliminate the International Trade Commission and transfer oversight of intellectual property rights to the Treasury Department.

$56
 Eliminate the Trade and Development Agency.

$29
 Eliminate the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

$19
 Eliminate the East&#8211;West Center.

$17
 Eliminate the United States Institute of Peace.

$2
 Eliminate the Japan&#8211;United States Friendship Commission.

Justice

$7,334
 Eliminate all Justice Department grants except those from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Institute of Justice,
thereby empowering states to finance their own justice programs.

$398
 Eliminate the Legal Services Corporation.

$32
 Eliminate the Justice Department&#8217;s Community Relations Service.

$30
 Eliminate the duplicative Office of National Drug Control Policy.

$26
 Reduce funding for the Justice Department&#8217;s Civil Rights Division by 20 percent
because of its policy against race-neutral enforcement of the law.

$4
 Eliminate the State Justice Institute.

Labor



$4,300
 Eliminate failed federal job training programs.

$2,000
 Eliminate the ineffective Job Corps.

$576
 Eliminate the Senior Community Service Employment Program.

National Science Foundation 

$1,700
 Reduce National Science Foundation funding to 2008 levels.

$86
 Eliminate National Science Foundation spending on elementary and secondary education.

Transportation

$45,000
 Devolve the federal highway program and most transit spending to the states.

$1,900
 Privatize Amtrak.

$1,009
 Eliminate grants to large and medium-sized hub airports.

$554
 Eliminate the Maritime Administration.

$125
 Eliminate the Essential Air Service Program.

Treasury

$26,646
 Eliminate the additional child refundable credit.

$103
 Eliminate the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.

Veterans

$2,500
 Cap increases in Department of Veterans Affairs health care spending.

$1,930
 Reduce Veterans&#8217; Disability Compensation to account for Social Security Disability Insurance payments.

Cross-Agency and Other

$60,000
 Repeal unspent stimulus spending.

$8,000
 Switch to using the &#8220;Superlative CPI&#8221; in funding calculations.

$6,000
 Repeal the Davis&#8211;Bacon Act.

$2,250
 Eliminate Federal Communications Commission funding for school Internet service.

$2,000
 Ban project labor agreements on all federally funded construction projects.

$1,000
 Eliminate the Small Business Administration, which unnecessarily intervenes in free markets.

$736
 Eliminate the National Community Service programs, such as AmeriCorps.

$253
 Eliminate the Institute of Museum Services and Library Services.

$140
 Eliminate the National Endowment for the Humanities.

$133
 Eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts.

$61
 Eliminate Army Corps of Engineers funding for beach replenishment projects.

$10
 Eliminate the Commission of Fine Arts.

$8
 Eliminate the National Capital Planning Commission.

$5
 Eliminate the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

Total



$343,207 million 

How to Cut the Federal Budget | The Heritage Foundation


----------



## daveman

Intense said:


> I have a thought on that. I say let the Military use DOD Personnel, on the gun ranges, when they are really really bad, the Military gets to use live ammo. Keep the Bureaucrat's in shape, on their toes, and really, really, agreeable. Cut down on Weenies real quick.


----------



## Samson

editec said:


> I too will be interested in seeing what the revived GOP will do with its control over the House.
> 
> I suspect that our TEA PARTY folks are going to be sorely disappointed when they finally realize that its going to be business as usual in Washington.
> 
> They are going to be, much as the right wing evangelists were, shocked when they see that the RNC leopard isn't going to change its spots.
> 
> But time will tell.
> 
> I see gridlock.
> 
> And before some of you cheer that gridlock, know that gridlock means that the tax cuts will automatically be repealed, and that the Obama HC plan will go into effect, too.
> 
> There's soemthing there for everybody to hate.



Indeed the RNC (Dem-Lite) will not change their spots.

On to 2012.

By then the Tea Party will have learned from 2010, and will only be more powerful, absorbing much of the R's and many Blue Dog Dems, leaving a very clear choice between purely conservative, and liberal candidates.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> actually there are major Strategic Advantages to a coordinated Military. Still different units play by different rules. I really support the Idea of a strong National Guard, that is controlled by the consent of the Governors, on loan to the President. I bet the Indian Tribes that are no more would have better appreciated National Guard Troops minding their own business What do you think? Then again I really appreciate how our Military responds to Natural Disasters around the world. There is no PR that can compare to that. Being in the right place at the right time, making the difference. When the Fed goes against one or a few States, it may take the day. When the Fed pisses off 66% to 75% of the States, it will lose.



Some of this I can get behind. Along with the idea that we should not be knocking over governments we don't like..because we don't like them. There will be of course, times we need to spank some other countries because they are involved in stupid things like genocide. But our actions should be limited, quick and lethal. The Balkans (which I agreed with) and Panama (which I didn't) should be the Templates along with the first American/Iraq war.

But we also should be able to do this far more cheaply then we do it today.


----------



## Samson

Zander said:


> Well liberals, here is a way to cut $343 BILLION from the next budget.
> 
> 
> 
> From the Heritage Foundation -
> Table 1: Spending Cuts for FY 2012
> 
> (in millions of dollars)
> 
> $26,646
> Eliminate the additional child refundable credit.
> 
> How to Cut the Federal Budget | The Heritage Foundation



WTF???

$26,646
"Eliminate the additional child refundable credit?"

Am I supposed to be getting some sort of credit for having kids?


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you think you did?  Is that $1.3 trillion worth?  Do we have our balanced budget?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no.  That was just a start.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I know the government is not supposed to be a jobs program, but it doesn't change the fact that unemployment would rise and we'd all suffer as a consequence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you're not willing to decrease the size of the government.
Click to expand...


Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you think you did?  Is that $1.3 trillion worth?  Do we have our balanced budget?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no.  That was just a start.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I know the government is not supposed to be a jobs program, but it doesn't change the fact that unemployment would rise and we'd all suffer as a consequence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you're not willing to decrease the size of the government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.
Click to expand...

Some of us don't need nannies.


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no.  That was just a start.
> 
> So you're not willing to decrease the size of the government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some of us don't need nannies.
Click to expand...


Very mature!  Yet you, like everyone else, count on government commons every day.

edit: If I'm remembering correctly, aren't you a public servant yourself?  YOU'RE WELCOME.


----------



## candycorn

Mini 14 said:


> I don't think anyone is going to tell Rand Paul what to do, or how to do it. If you think he's going to go up to Washington and disappear, you have a VERY rude awakening coming.



Being visible and being effective are two different things.  If anything is going to get passed that he wants, he has to agree with at least 49 other Senators.  Don't kid yourself.


----------



## candycorn

editec said:


> I too will be interested in seeing what the revived GOP will do with its control over the House.
> 
> I suspect that our TEA PARTY folks are going to be sorely disappointed when they finally realize that its going to be business as usual in Washington.
> 
> They are going to be, much as the right wing evangelists were, shocked when they see that the RNC leopard isn't going to change its spots.
> 
> But time will tell.
> 
> I see gridlock.
> 
> And before some of you cheer that gridlock, know that gridlock means that the tax cuts will automatically be repealed, and that the Obama HC plan will go into effect, too.
> 
> There's soemthing there for everybody to hate.


*
Sadly, I think you're right; gridlock!

Our system of government only works when there is a basic trust in the POTUS.  In this environment of total mis-trust and robot like allegiance to EVERYTHING but the Republic for which the flag stands; it is positively dysfunctional.  

Either we change the Constitution or find that trust once more or this nation is doomed.  

*


----------



## candycorn

Cuyo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  it is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
Click to expand...


Pick up a recent issue of Esquire; they have a panel that balances the budget using means that sound very pragmatic; but in the context of politics; probably not realistic.  Some good stuff.  Raising the retirement age to 70 was one of the ideas; revamping the military--something that we could do tomorrow was another.  Of course balancing the budget is just a small step toward getting out of debt.  It would take several years under the most apolitical of environments.


----------



## Jroc

They already have a plan Paul Ryan is a genus on this stuff..read it an learn something.

A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



Why do you throw social security and medicare out there like that?  

you do realize those are 2 programs that you actually PAY INTO your entire life then get the money back.   

Anyway they get things done by not comprimising on those principles.  Even if things dont go the way they want as long as they stick to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government in their votes and any proposed legislation they will be safe for re-election next time.   If they dont they will be gone.


----------



## Synthaholic

daveman said:


> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.



The problem is that they have spread Defense $$$ to all 50 states and none of them want it to end.  Just another form of welfare.


----------



## Revere

Is defense the only budget item that counts toward the deficit?


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no.  That was just a start.
> 
> So you're not willing to decrease the size of the government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some of us don't need nannies.
Click to expand...


Wow!  A real genuine frontiersman.  People ever get pissed off at you for trail blazin through their property?  Live off the land do you?  No fancy shit like running water and sewer for you right sport?  No need to use the public roads cuz you don't roll like that.  Cops? Fire department? That shits for pussies.  So what are you doing on the internet Daniel Boone?  This here is public domain.  Don't tell me ya made your own radio out of twigs and animal parts and fudged a little tapping into the public airways.  That must be how ya learned about the internets.  Gotta hand it to ya though..I've built rudimentary radios but don't think I could build a computer from foraged debris.  Why is it that you have a computer anyway?  You don't need any people for anything so why are you communicating.  I don't want to be your wet nurse and hear about your self sufficiant lifestyle any more than you want to share the cost of my nanny.


----------



## Dante

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



You will get few if any reasonable responses. The Tea Party Kooks are incapable of rational conversation. Too much caffeine and tannin.


----------



## Dante

oh look! 

17 pages of posts and how did _rightwinger_ do getting reasonable and rational answers to the simplest of questions "What are you going to cut?"?


----------



## Dante

*Revere posts*

_It's not the "same old city." Obama has made it bigger and more powerful than every before._
*and gets thanks from the peanut gallery @ USMB*

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Revere For This Useful Post:
CMike (Today), Newby (Today), Samson (Today), Zoom-boing (Today)

--------------------
*
Cali-Boil posts*

_"Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.

Live with it._
*
and gets thanks from the USMB Fool Pool*

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to California Girl For This Useful Post:
hipeter924 (Today), Sherry (Today), topspin (Today)

----------------
*
Poor Intense posts*

_Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely. 

Government Salaries and hours worked per week is questionable. Extended vacation time. Waste Waste Waste.
_

  what percentage of what fraction of the budget would those cuts (using 'cuts' loosely -- labor laws? )?

but Intense gets credit for the effort.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.
> 
> 
> 
> Some of us don't need nannies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Very mature!  Yet you, like everyone else, count on government commons every day.
> 
> edit: If I'm remembering correctly, aren't you a public servant yourself?  YOU'RE WELCOME.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, another mindless leftist claiming military service is support of socialism.  

What a tool.

There's only two things wrong with that singularly stupid point of view:  I earn my pay and benefits, and defense spending is mandated by the Constitution.


----------



## daveman

Synthaholic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that they have spread Defense $$$ to all 50 states and none of them want it to end.  Just another form of welfare.
Click to expand...

And that's why DoD's needs are more important than Congress'.


----------



## daveman

Revere said:


> Is defense the only budget item that counts toward the deficit?


Hey!  That's good money that could be going to buy Democrat vot -- errr, "helping those less fortunate"!


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doing so now would have severe repercussions; severe to the point that it's not even worth discussing because the BOGSATs won't let it happen.  When the economy is burgeoning, perhaps.  But predictably, no it's not a big priority of mine.  I don't find the size of government to be overwhelmingly large or over burdensome.  I'm also of the opinion that some things are better handled in the public interest; And yes that means the government.
> 
> 
> 
> Some of us don't need nannies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow!  A real genuine frontiersman.  People ever get pissed off at you for trail blazin through their property?  Live off the land do you?  No fancy shit like running water and sewer for you right sport?  No need to use the public roads cuz you don't roll like that.  Cops? Fire department? That shits for pussies.  So what are you doing on the internet Daniel Boone?  This here is public domain.  Don't tell me ya made your own radio out of twigs and animal parts and fudged a little tapping into the public airways.  That must be how ya learned about the internets.  Gotta hand it to ya though..I've built rudimentary radios but don't think I could build a computer from foraged debris.  Why is it that you have a computer anyway?  You don't need any people for anything so why are you communicating.  I don't want to be your wet nurse and hear about your self sufficiant lifestyle any more than you want to share the cost of my nanny.
Click to expand...

*yawn*  Just because you're incapable of making decisions about your life doesn't mean everyone else is.


----------



## daveman

Dante said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will get few if any reasonable responses. The Tea Party Kooks are incapable of rational conversation. Too much caffeine and tannin.
Click to expand...




Dante said:


> oh look!
> 
> 17 pages of posts and how did _rightwinger_ do getting reasonable and rational answers to the simplest of questions "What are you going to cut?"?


----------



## rightwinger

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you throw social security and medicare out there like that?
> 
> you do realize those are 2 programs that you actually PAY INTO your entire life then get the money back.
> 
> Anyway they get things done by not comprimising on those principles.  Even if things dont go the way they want as long as they stick to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government in their votes and any proposed legislation they will be safe for re-election next time.   If they dont they will be gone.
Click to expand...


I included Social Security and Medicare because both need serious refinancing to remain viable. They both still involve money coming out of our pockets.
While we are balancing the budget we also need to.....whats the word?........Man-up....... and fix Social Security

Raising the retirement age for those under 50 to 70 is a good start.

You don't get your money back from Social Security or Medicare. Your money is gone. It went to pay for current retirees. You have to rely on contributions from your childrens and grandchildrens generation


----------



## magnum

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.


----------



## Revere

magnum said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
Click to expand...


Liberty is the answer to the problems facing America today.


----------



## topspin

Under 50 is a perfect line to draw in the sand for raising retirement age.


----------



## rightwinger

> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you throw social security and medicare out there like that?
> 
> you do realize those are 2 programs that you actually PAY INTO your entire life then get the money back.
> 
> *Anyway they get things done by not comprimising on those principles.  Even if things dont go the way they want as long as they stick to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government in their votes and any proposed legislation they will be safe for re-election next time.   If they dont they will be gone.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pilgrim
> 
> You have been involved in the Tea Party since the beginning and I believe you are sincere in your views towards government and spending. I have tried to be civil in this discussion and have asked a simple question of the Tea Party....
> 
> Now that you are elected you can no longer  talk about "principles of lower taxes and smaller government" you need to talk specifics. This thread is 18 pages and only daveman and Zander have talked specifics.
> 
> If you want smaller government you need to be honest with people and tell them what part of government will get smaller and what the impact of that cut will be. I don't think it is asking too much.
> 
> If you want to talk lower taxes. Start with the Bush tax cuts and show how you will make up for the $4 trillion in lost revenue. Cutting earmarks and National Public Radio will not do it
Click to expand...


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberty is the answer to the problems facing America today.
Click to expand...


You forgot truth, justice and the American way


----------



## Intense

Dante said:


> *Revere posts*
> 
> _It's not the "same old city." Obama has made it bigger and more powerful than every before._
> *and gets thanks from the peanut gallery @ USMB*
> 
> The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Revere For This Useful Post:
> CMike (Today), Newby (Today), Samson (Today), Zoom-boing (Today)
> 
> --------------------
> *
> Cali-Boil posts*
> 
> _"Yes, We Can". I believe that summed up Obama's campaign. Never did answer the 'can what?' thing... but we know now... and we just told him 'no, you can't'.
> 
> Live with it._
> *
> and gets thanks from the USMB Fool Pool*
> 
> The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to California Girl For This Useful Post:
> hipeter924 (Today), Sherry (Today), topspin (Today)
> 
> ----------------
> *
> Poor Intense posts*
> 
> _Me Personally. I'd work on fair labor laws. Union's out of Government completely.
> 
> Government Salaries and hours worked per week is questionable. Extended vacation time. Waste Waste Waste.
> _
> 
> what percentage of what fraction of the budget would those cuts (using 'cuts' loosely -- labor laws? )?
> 
> but Intense gets credit for the effort.



Just keep giving Raises and Jobs to those that think like you, but with all of you having your heads so far up your asses, who drives the car? You wonder why you are in a ditch? Bush, at least had 911 as a real reason to spend. That reason also included rebuilding the Military that Clinton cut to shit to bribe votes. The one thing Your Crowd shines in Dante is incompetence. No matter how bad things get, when your crowd fucks with it, it goes from bad to worse. Don't get me wrong, Piss ant, I blame RINO's too, spending like Democrats, or drunken Sailors, trying to buy popularity,  just like you. Bottom line, there is no excuse for what you do. I know it's all you have, a talent to bitch and complain, but that is where it ends. You sure can't govern. You don't understand Federalism, or the right to voice, when it opposes you. Government Program after Program, designed to make us all dependent on Government. The Marxist way. Who are you trying to fool, There is no substitute for Value for Value. Put Something in Take Something out. What you are about in the end is your control over others. You can't stand people having interests that don't concern you. ow would I save Spending, I would probably start out by doing the opposite of how you do what you do. Where you find excuses to continue doing harmful acts, I would seek to streamline and find more efficient ways to fulfill the necessary role of Government function. I would dismantle agencies that have overstepped their role, and reform them, bringing them into compliance with their purpose for being. Unions out the fucking door. They are a disease. Oversight and transparency yes, redundancy, no. Value for Value.  You can't handle the truth Dante, because there is nothing in it for you. It's actually not about you, but the false values that have been programed into you. We got the House, You still control the Presidency and the Senate. The Question is What are you going to do?


----------



## Intense

magnum said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
Click to expand...


They are the People. They, We actually did pretty good. Win some, lose some, the whole effect was energizing. The people are not like Politicians, we aren't gonna be resting. We are big on Reform. Enumerated Powers, Government being accountable to the People, Government by the consent of the Governed, reading Bills and Discussing and amending them before signing them. It's a different age now, more and more, we have real time access to the truth. Tats part of the difference.


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you throw social security and medicare out there like that?
> 
> you do realize those are 2 programs that you actually PAY INTO your entire life then get the money back.
> 
> *Anyway they get things done by not comprimising on those principles.  Even if things dont go the way they want as long as they stick to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government in their votes and any proposed legislation they will be safe for re-election next time.   If they dont they will be gone.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> Pilgrim
> 
> You have been involved in the Tea Party since the beginning and I believe you are sincere in your views towards government and spending. I have tried to be civil in this discussion and have asked a simple question of the Tea Party....
> 
> Now that you are elected you can no longer  talk about "principles of lower taxes and smaller government" you need to talk specifics. This thread is 18 pages and only daveman and Zander have talked specifics.
> 
> If you want smaller government you need to be honest with people and tell them what part of government will get smaller and what the impact of that cut will be. I don't think it is asking too much.
> 
> If you want to talk lower taxes. Start with the Bush tax cuts and show how you will make up for the $4 trillion in lost revenue. Cutting earmarks and National Public Radio will not do it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Bush tax cuts are only a problem in the context of the Obama spending increases.
Click to expand...


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pilgrim
> 
> You have been involved in the Tea Party since the beginning and I believe you are sincere in your views towards government and spending. I have tried to be civil in this discussion and have asked a simple question of the Tea Party....
> 
> Now that you are elected you can no longer  talk about "principles of lower taxes and smaller government" you need to talk specifics. This thread is 18 pages and only daveman and Zander have talked specifics.
> 
> If you want smaller government you need to be honest with people and tell them what part of government will get smaller and what the impact of that cut will be. I don't think it is asking too much.
> 
> If you want to talk lower taxes. Start with the Bush tax cuts and show how you will make up for the $4 trillion in lost revenue. Cutting earmarks and National Public Radio will not do it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bush tax cuts are only a problem in the context of the Obama spending increases.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then how did Bush run up $5 trillion in debt?
Click to expand...


----------



## rightwinger

magnum said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
Click to expand...


Keep in mind that the Tea Party has only been in existence for two years. As they arrive in Washington, I expect they will act like two year olds and scream and throw tantrums when they don't get their way.

Like a two year old they will have to learn how to get along with others or be sent to the corner


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that the Tea Party has only been in existence for two years. As they arrive in Washington, I expect they will act like two year olds and scream and throw tantrums when they don't get their way.
> 
> Like a two year old they will have to learn how to get along with others or be sent to the corner
Click to expand...


Funny.  You want to simultaneously claim they will be destructive, and then claim they really won't get what they want, depending on what works for your argument at the time.


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some of us don't need nannies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very mature!  Yet you, like everyone else, count on government commons every day.
> 
> edit: If I'm remembering correctly, aren't you a public servant yourself?  YOU'RE WELCOME.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ahhh, another mindless leftist claiming military service is support of socialism.
> 
> What a tool.
> 
> There's only two things wrong with that singularly stupid point of view:  I earn my pay and benefits, and defense spending is mandated by the Constitution.
Click to expand...


Hmm that's weird, my other employees don't talk to me that way.  But I digress.

Why do you do this to me Dave?  You lead into into a discussion with some civility, like we can actually have a healthy debate, then you get frustrated and say something like "Some of us don't need nannies."


----------



## Cuyo

rightwinger said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you throw social security and medicare out there like that?
> 
> you do realize those are 2 programs that you actually PAY INTO your entire life then get the money back.
> 
> Anyway they get things done by not comprimising on those principles.  Even if things dont go the way they want as long as they stick to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government in their votes and any proposed legislation they will be safe for re-election next time.   If they dont they will be gone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I included Social Security and Medicare because both need serious refinancing to remain viable. They both still involve money coming out of our pockets.
> While we are balancing the budget we also need to.....whats the word?........Man-up....... and fix Social Security
> 
> Raising the retirement age for those under 50 to 70 is a good start.
> 
> You don't get your money back from Social Security or Medicare. Your money is gone. It went to pay for current retirees. You have to rely on contributions from your childrens and grandchildrens generation
Click to expand...


Raising the retirement age is probably necessary, but I'd eliminate the upper limit for paying in first, and make Schedule E income subject to payroll tax.


----------



## Bill Angel

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution spells out providing for the national defense.
> 
> The other crap is expendable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
Click to expand...


Some good news came out of the election results:

"A fiscally responsible thing happened on the way to the November 2 election:  Rep. Eric Cantor (R.-Va.) announced on behalf of the House Republican Leadership an internal party rule mandating that Republicans will not earmark in the next Congress.  This is excellent news for the Tea Party movement and it fills in a missing element of the 'Pledge to America.'
See: Tea Partys First Victim: Earmarks

According to one source, earmarks added $15.9 billion to Federal spending in FY 2010

I think that the politics here could get pretty messy. 
Suppose the Senators of a particular state are Democrats, but the newly elected Congressman in a district in the Senators' state is a Republican. If the Democrat Senators support continuing funding for an earmark for a project in the district with a Republican Congressman, will the Congressman refuse out of principle to support the earmark funding, even though his refusal will result in depriving his own constituents of federal dollars?  If he does refuse to support the earmark, the Democrats will make good use of this fact in an effort to defeat him in the election 2 years from now!


----------



## rightwinger

Bill Angel said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's too complicated for RW. Can you break it down better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some good news came out of the election results:
> 
> "A fiscally responsible thing happened on the way to the November 2 election:  Rep. Eric Cantor (R.-Va.) announced on behalf of the House Republican Leadership an internal party rule mandating that Republicans will not earmark in the next Congress.  This is excellent news for the Tea Party movement and it fills in a missing element of the 'Pledge to America.'
> See: Tea Partys First Victim: Earmarks
> 
> According to one source, earmarks added $15.9 billion to Federal spending in FY 2010
> 
> I think that the politics here could get pretty messy.
> Suppose the Senators of a particular state are Democrats, but the newly elected Congressman in a district in the Senators' state is a Republican. If the Democrat Senators support continuing funding for an earmark for a project in the district with a Republican Congressman, will the Congressman refuse out of principle to support the earmark funding, even though his refusal will result in depriving his own constituents of federal dollars?  If he does refuse to support the earmark, the Democrats will make good use of this fact in an effort to defeat him in the election 2 years from now!
Click to expand...


I will believe it when I see it. Prepare for hidden earmarks just like we have hidden campaign contributions


----------



## Revere

rightwinger said:


> Bill Angel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....you guys just got elected on cutting spending and the first thing you do is increase spending.
> 
> Why am I not surprised?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some good news came out of the election results:
> 
> "A fiscally responsible thing happened on the way to the November 2 election:  Rep. Eric Cantor (R.-Va.) announced on behalf of the House Republican Leadership an internal party rule mandating that Republicans will not earmark in the next Congress.  This is excellent news for the Tea Party movement and it fills in a missing element of the 'Pledge to America.'
> See: Tea Partys First Victim: Earmarks
> 
> According to one source, earmarks added $15.9 billion to Federal spending in FY 2010
> 
> I think that the politics here could get pretty messy.
> Suppose the Senators of a particular state are Democrats, but the newly elected Congressman in a district in the Senators' state is a Republican. If the Democrat Senators support continuing funding for an earmark for a project in the district with a Republican Congressman, will the Congressman refuse out of principle to support the earmark funding, even though his refusal will result in depriving his own constituents of federal dollars?  If he does refuse to support the earmark, the Democrats will make good use of this fact in an effort to defeat him in the election 2 years from now!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I will believe it when I see it. Prepare for hidden earmarks just like we have hidden campaign contributions
Click to expand...


Nah, you'll cry about it when you see it.  Your little pet projects will be torpedoed.


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that the Tea Party has only been in existence for two years. As they arrive in Washington, I expect they will act like two year olds and scream and throw tantrums when they don't get their way.
> 
> Like a two year old they will have to learn how to get along with others or be sent to the corner
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny.  You want to simultaneously claim they will be destructive, and then claim they really won't get what they want, depending on what works for your argument at the time.
Click to expand...



The Tea Party candidates have already made it clear they are unwilling to compromise, unwilling to consider the opinions of others, unwilling to seek common ground.

Like the two year olds they are, they will find that threats and temper tantrums will not help you get your way


----------



## Intense

As opposed to Obama.


----------



## Jroc

Dante said:


> oh look!
> 
> 17 pages of posts and how did _rightwinger_ do getting reasonable and rational answers to the simplest of questions "What are you going to cut?"?



Look ...You can cut money from all these government agencies; they are all full of waste stupid bureaucratic positions EVERY DEPT IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN BE CUT!! The problem with you libs is every time someone throws up and idea on what can be cut, you start with you're stupid sob stories. We can't...these people will be hurt....how will we do that those people will be hurt. that&#8217;s the problem with a massive federal government they are too much involved in every aspect of our life, Some people will be hurt in the short run, mainly government workers but in the long run we can avoid bankruptcy Government as to be reformed      


The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans


----------



## Synthaholic

daveman said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was just a start, as I said.  There are more liberal programs I'd cut.
> 
> But to please the liberals, I would change defense acquisition.  Far too much waste.  I would have Congress listen more to DoD when deciding defense appropriations than to Congressmen with defense contractors in their home states.  If the USAF says they don't need any more C-17s, don't make them to buy any more.  That forces the AF to hire more people to fly and maintain them, taking money from other programs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that they have spread Defense $$$ to all 50 states and none of them want it to end.  Just another form of welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And that's why DoD's needs are more important than Congress'.
Click to expand...

No doubt.  Now tell that to Congress.  Tell, say, Orin Hatch that we don't need that facility/base/manufacturer/etc. in Utah any longer.  Do you think he's going to say "sure - whatever is best for our military and our country"?


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give it a couple of weeks and we will be buying our own oil from china. Everyone else around the world is into drilling, at least where it's feasible to drill. I have no problem with responsible drilling. Government is supposed to regulate, monitor, and help insure against accidents. That does make sense. What doesn't make sense is paying for something that you you don't receive, other than in the form of illusion. Inspections that never happened, things like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no "our own oil".  Even when it comes from America's ground.  All oil goes on the world market.  That's just a fact.
> 
> It's frustrating to try to discuss politics with people who don't understand the issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! Good one. *It's still our oil*, or you are implying that anyone can just show up and claim it, just drill where and when they want? Someone or some entity owns it from the instant it comes out of the ground. Some people don't understand anything huh, like the connection with surplus and worth. How about the refineries, the relationship there with reserve and price, all of the different rules governing refinement. It's wasteful.
Click to expand...


What does it matter?  Even if we drill in Texas, the oil goes on the world market.  We cannot and have never said "this is American oil that will stay in America".  It doesn't.  That's why the arguments for opening ANWR are dumb.  It won't help us get off of foreign drilled oil, because we cannot keep that Alaskan oil within the U.S.

So my only concerns about the Chinese drilling in the Gulf is the safety of the rigs, not the oil that is produced.


----------



## Synthaholic

Intense said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Uptake: Senator Al Franken at Dayton Rally | Al Franken - U.S. Senator, Minnesota
> 
> 
> 
> You're a lazy debater.  Or you just don't know how to debate.
> 
> You claimed that the accomplishments I listed were propaganda.  List which accomplishment is propaganda, and why.
> 
> Use your own words.  Don't just post a link.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fail, I questioned your ability to separate propaganda from reality. You presumed I was limited to what was on your list. Who profits on all of the Credit Card loans along with the bank? Who is the Banks silent partner? Who benefits when you get insurance coverage but your claim or procedure is denied. Do you really believe that the Government just mandates stuff in your interest and it's done. Think smoke screen, or bait and switch. Government pretty much gets funded or profits on every side of the equation, every time money changes hands, fast or slow. So it really isn't about the money, but about the control. Tell me, when you shop, do you wait for the sales to end? No You purchase when it is more to your advantage not less. The same holds for business spending, both business and Government profit from both volume and keeping the lines of supply running, government getting a cut in one form or another, every step of the way. Yet, it is never enough, and Government workers are never over paid, no matter whether their job is relevant or not. School Tuitions. How much do you think those tuitions would drop if there was a 50% drop in enrollment? What's the interest on that Federal Student loan? Does the Fed risk that you won't pay, like a financial Institution? No, they will track you to your grave? How come the interest on your student loan is not greed? It is Profit,  right? Why is the interest so high. Hmmmm...... Socialism is not compatible with Federalism. That is what I have against your reasoning. Everything of value has to come from someone or something. Somebody paid the true cost.
Click to expand...


Are you under the impression that a run-on paragragh is a coherent answer?

I listed accomplishments under Obama.

You claimed those accomplishments are propaganda.

I challenged you to list which of those accomplishments are propaganda.

You punted.

Would you care to try again, or do you just wish to forget that you ever said anything?


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no "our own oil".  Even when it comes from America's ground.  All oil goes on the world market.  That's just a fact.
> 
> It's frustrating to try to discuss politics with people who don't understand the issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! Good one. *It's still our oil*, or you are implying that anyone can just show up and claim it, just drill where and when they want? Someone or some entity owns it from the instant it comes out of the ground. Some people don't understand anything huh, like the connection with surplus and worth. How about the refineries, the relationship there with reserve and price, all of the different rules governing refinement. It's wasteful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does it matter?  Even if we drill in Texas, the oil goes on the world market.  We cannot and have never said "this is American oil that will stay in America".  It doesn't.  That's why the arguments for opening ANWR are dumb.  It won't help us get off of foreign drilled oil, because we cannot keep that Alaskan oil within the U.S.
> 
> So my only concerns about the Chinese drilling in the Gulf is the safety of the rigs, not the oil that is produced.
Click to expand...


What does it matter at this point whether it stays here or comes back here? It is sold in the global market, so what? Drilling will increase availability, and availability insures fair pricing, it insures against price gouging and fake shortages. Safety is alway's an issue with me, we are in agreement. Criminal Negligence should have heavy consequences. That holds true for producers and regulators too. We are in total agreement there.


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're a lazy debater.  Or you just don't know how to debate.
> 
> You claimed that the accomplishments I listed were propaganda.  List which accomplishment is propaganda, and why.
> 
> Use your own words.  Don't just post a link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fail, I questioned your ability to separate propaganda from reality. You presumed I was limited to what was on your list. Who profits on all of the Credit Card loans along with the bank? Who is the Banks silent partner? Who benefits when you get insurance coverage but your claim or procedure is denied. Do you really believe that the Government just mandates stuff in your interest and it's done. Think smoke screen, or bait and switch. Government pretty much gets funded or profits on every side of the equation, every time money changes hands, fast or slow. So it really isn't about the money, but about the control. Tell me, when you shop, do you wait for the sales to end? No You purchase when it is more to your advantage not less. The same holds for business spending, both business and Government profit from both volume and keeping the lines of supply running, government getting a cut in one form or another, every step of the way. Yet, it is never enough, and Government workers are never over paid, no matter whether their job is relevant or not. School Tuitions. How much do you think those tuitions would drop if there was a 50% drop in enrollment? What's the interest on that Federal Student loan? Does the Fed risk that you won't pay, like a financial Institution? No, they will track you to your grave? How come the interest on your student loan is not greed? It is Profit,  right? Why is the interest so high. Hmmmm...... Socialism is not compatible with Federalism. That is what I have against your reasoning. Everything of value has to come from someone or something. Somebody paid the true cost.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you under the impression that a run-on paragragh is a coherent answer?
> 
> I listed accomplishments under Obama.
> 
> You claimed those accomplishments are propaganda.
> 
> I challenged you to list which of those accomplishments are propaganda.
> 
> You punted.
> 
> Would you care to try again, or do you just wish to forget that you ever said anything?
Click to expand...


What you call accomplishments I don't. There may be mixed blessings, true enough, but at what cost? My first concern when fixes are established is whether or not they are in deed compatible with our form of Government, our Economic System, or do they undermine or conflict with Fundamental Principle. Where there is conflict, there is compound damage, something has to give. When Government Weight and Over Regulation cause added burden, adding to the cost of service, and then Government partially relieves that burden, even temporarily, what is really gained? I fully support Government being the Referee, the key to me, is a light touch. We lost that long ago. For Government to create problems, and then take credit for half assed fixes, is disingenuous. There are other options, both more and less effective, more and less expensive. When Centralized Government abandons Federalism and Federalist Principles, it does abandon reason and flexibility. All the eggs end up in one basket. Sink or swim, all other options are removed. You like to make fun of mt writing style, that is your problem, not mine. Get over yourself, it is unbecoming. There is nothing coherent about Statism, other than the end result is just another brand of Tyranny, no more, no less.


----------



## Intense

Synthaholic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that they have spread Defense $$$ to all 50 states and none of them want it to end.  Just another form of welfare.
> 
> 
> 
> And that's why DoD's needs are more important than Congress'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No doubt.  Now tell that to Congress.  Tell, say, Orin Hatch that we don't need that facility/base/manufacturer/etc. in Utah any longer.  Do you think he's going to say "sure - whatever is best for our military and our country"?
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter what he say's, when it separates from reason.


----------



## Sallow

candycorn said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being so paranoid. No one is going to cut social security or medicare. What will happen and needs to , is to extend Bush' tax cuts, freeze spending, defund Obamacare and other wasteful programs like NPR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pick up a recent issue of Esquire; they have a panel that balances the budget using means that sound very pragmatic; but in the context of politics; probably not realistic.  Some good stuff.  Raising the retirement age to 70 was one of the ideas; revamping the military--something that we could do tomorrow was another.  Of course balancing the budget is just a small step toward getting out of debt.  It would take several years under the most apolitical of environments.
Click to expand...


No need to pick up the magazine. There is a link.

Balance the Budget Findings - How to Balance the Federal Budget - Esquire

And they recommend that the current Health Care Reform Package remain as is..


----------



## rightwinger

Sallow said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freeze spending where?  And what do we do with the additional uninsured that will result?  Non-military discretionary is about $610 Billion.  If you wipe out the entire government, less mandatory programs and military, you can cut the deficit in half, while only raising unemployment a few points resulting in deeper depression.
> 
> Please, tell us where you want to make the cuts.  That's why this conversation sounds like a broken record.  We never get to the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pick up a recent issue of Esquire; they have a panel that balances the budget using means that sound very pragmatic; but in the context of politics; probably not realistic.  Some good stuff.  Raising the retirement age to 70 was one of the ideas; revamping the military--something that we could do tomorrow was another.  Of course balancing the budget is just a small step toward getting out of debt.  It would take several years under the most apolitical of environments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No need to pick up the magazine. There is a link.
> 
> Balance the Budget Findings - How to Balance the Federal Budget - Esquire
> 
> And they recommend that the current Health Care Reform Package remain as is..
Click to expand...


Does the Tea Party read Esquire???


----------



## Sallow

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pick up a recent issue of Esquire; they have a panel that balances the budget using means that sound very pragmatic; but in the context of politics; probably not realistic.  Some good stuff.  Raising the retirement age to 70 was one of the ideas; revamping the military--something that we could do tomorrow was another.  Of course balancing the budget is just a small step toward getting out of debt.  It would take several years under the most apolitical of environments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need to pick up the magazine. There is a link.
> 
> Balance the Budget Findings - How to Balance the Federal Budget - Esquire
> 
> And they recommend that the current Health Care Reform Package remain as is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does the Tea Party read Esquire???
Click to expand...


Dunno.

Might be a good way to sort of talk them down.


----------



## magnum

Intense said:


> As opposed to Obama.



Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.


----------



## daveman

magnum said:


> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.



We told you the same thing about Obama.  The only difference, time will show that we were right and you are wrong.


----------



## daveman

Revere said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Tea party are going to be a disaster in Washington. They have no idea what they are doing and have managed to fool a lot of people into believing they have the answers to the problems facing America today. They don't , and people are gonna find that out soon enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberty is the answer to the problems facing America today.
Click to expand...

It's astounding the number of people who want to turn over their liberties to government.  Freedom frightens them.  They want to be subjects, not citizens.


----------



## daveman

rightwinger said:


> Keep in mind that the Tea Party has only been in existence for two years. As they arrive in Washington, I expect they will act like two year olds and scream and throw tantrums when they don't get their way.
> 
> Like a two year old they will have to learn how to get along with others or be sent to the corner


That's exactly what Obama's done.  Tuesday, he was sent to the corner.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> Hmm that's weird, my other employees don't talk to me that way.  But I digress.


You think you're in my chain of command?  Well, that's amusing.  You are, but not directly.  If you're considering the idea of ordering me to agree with you, go ahead, but you'll only be disappointed.  


Cuyo said:


> Why do you do this to me Dave?  You lead into into a discussion with some civility, like we can actually have a healthy debate, then you get frustrated and say something like "Some of us don't need nannies."


No frustration.  The policies and programs you support show you want the government to run individual lives.

Don't like it being pointed out bluntly?  Then come down on the side of individual liberty.  Simple, huh?


----------



## daveman

Synthaholic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that they have spread Defense $$$ to all 50 states and none of them want it to end.  Just another form of welfare.
> 
> 
> 
> And that's why DoD's needs are more important than Congress'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No doubt.  Now tell that to Congress.  Tell, say, Orin Hatch that we don't need that facility/base/manufacturer/etc. in Utah any longer.  Do you think he's going to say "sure - whatever is best for our military and our country"?
Click to expand...

If DoD decides we don't need the base or the equipment produced by the factory in Utah, then Hatch had best go along with it.  DoD knows how better to manage our nation's defense than any Congressman.


----------



## daveman

magnum said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

magnum said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
Click to expand...


----------



## Lonestar_logic

drsmith1072 said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what will you say when none or most of what you say NEEDS to happen doesn't happen??
> 
> Furthermore, several on the right are against socialism and SS and medicare are socialist programs that many believe either need to be done away with, stripped away to almost nothing or privatized into nonexistence. So how can you honestly claim that "NO ONE" is going to cut them when a large portion of republicans are against such socialist big government programs??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It will happen.
> 
> Let's see a Republican concensus that they want to cut SS and/or medicare. It should be easy since you claim a large portion of them do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL Thanks for the baseless and sunbstanceless prediction nostradumbass but I did ask a question however, I see that you avoided it. Imagine that.
> 
> Furthermore, it is a simple conclusion to make when the tea party movement was all about antisocialism which spread throughout the party, especially when you consider that the SS and medicare are socialist programs. How can you be both for and against socialism??
Click to expand...


In other words your conclusion is based assumptions and you have no legitimate source to back up your claims.  I get it.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Cuyo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> The HC bill does not provide taxpayer funded insurance.  It is responsible for 0.0% of the current deficit.  If your argument is that it will result in deficit in the future, speculate away.  But so far you have not addressed the current deficit, not one bit.
> 
> Any other suggestions?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't bring up the "uninsured" you did.
> 
> Get your head out of your ass and pay attention!
> 
> According to the CBO. Obamacare will add 109 Billion to the deficit over ten years.
> 
> So defunding Obamacare and then repealing it, we will avoid adding 109 billion to the deficit. You people are stupid.
> 
> Lucky for me I got work to do.
> 
> Adios!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but where the hell exactly did I bring up the uninsured?
> 
> Edit: OHHH I see... No that original post should have read "Unemployed," not "Uninsured."
Click to expand...


You are one stupid fuck, you couldn't remember what you typed so you had to go back and reread it. And now you claim you misspoke!  What an idiot!


----------



## candycorn

Dante said:


> oh look!
> 
> 17 pages of posts and how did _rightwinger_ do getting reasonable and rational answers to the simplest of questions "What are you going to cut?"?



I'll let someone else do the math but here are some things I would cut if I had the ability to do so:

Any air wing of the military that isn't carrier based or part of the air force.  We do not need 5 different air wings in the military. Theres some tweaking in that (helicopters for one) but does every branch of the service need to have every toy it can afford?  No.  

End all funding (temporarily) for the NEA, CPB and other grants for the arts.  The private sector will take over most of this.  Trust me, I can't imagine my weekends without NPR and I could likely go toe to toe with anybody when it comes to Prairie Home Companion trivia. 
It is one of the best things that Americans receive for their tax monies...but it's something we shouldn't be spending money on when we're this far in the hole. 

Bring the troops home from over-seas except in super-hot spots like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Korea.  Lease bases to local military with the stipulation that at the drop of the hat, we can take them back over.  Outsource the upkeep where possible for the bases to keep them ready.  Once the troops are home, raise the standards of the military (strength and conditioning standards) to remove the weakest memebers.  Sorry ladies but I'm talking about women primarily.  Keep the smartest and most qualified persons--regardless of gender.

Close most air force bases and expand the ones that are kept.  Build logical new bases in the two or three areas that would need it after consolidation.  Consolidate space launch capabilities into those bases; KSC is old and needs to be shuttered as well.

Remove 10 percent of Interstate roadways based on usage and thereby reduce costs for upkeep

Discontinue Saturday mail delivery and all weekend mail deliveries

Shut down one of the federal mints.  

Reduce federal funding for health education services.  Local health authorities do most of the heavy lifting in that area anyway.

Reduce WIC to age 4 except for the most extreme cases.

End unemployment benefits after twelve weeks except in the most extreme cases (such as a large employer shutting down and causing a spike in unemployment claims--30,000 people for example--can't all find jobs at Dairy Queen).  Perhaps put extensions into a lottery system by which only a few applicants get extended.  

Start a program for the 13th week by where community services are provided under the auspices of the current community service infastructure.  This will help rehabilitate the infastructure.  

This one isn't a cut but it is something that needs to be done; give POTUS the line item veto.


----------



## Synthaholic

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pick up a recent issue of Esquire; they have a panel that balances the budget using means that sound very pragmatic; but in the context of politics; probably not realistic.  Some good stuff.  Raising the retirement age to 70 was one of the ideas; revamping the military--something that we could do tomorrow was another.  Of course balancing the budget is just a small step toward getting out of debt.  It would take several years under the most apolitical of environments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need to pick up the magazine. There is a link.
> 
> Balance the Budget Findings - How to Balance the Federal Budget - Esquire
> 
> And they recommend that the current Health Care Reform Package remain as is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does the Tea Party read Esquire???
Click to expand...

Does the tea party read?


----------



## Synthaholic

daveman said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> And that's why DoD's needs are more important than Congress'.
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt.  Now tell that to Congress.  Tell, say, Orin Hatch that we don't need that facility/base/manufacturer/etc. in Utah any longer.  Do you think he's going to say "sure - whatever is best for our military and our country"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If DoD decides we don't need the base or the equipment produced by the factory in Utah, then Hatch had best go along with it.  DoD knows how better to manage our nation's defense than any Congressman.
Click to expand...


I think we agree.  But how do you force Hatch to "go along with it"?  There is just as much arrogance on the Right as on the Left when it comes to Congressional Lifers.  For every Rangel there is a Hatch.  For every Dingel there is a McCain.  For every Feinstein there is an Inhofe.


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm that's weird, my other employees don't talk to me that way.  But I digress.
> 
> 
> 
> You think you're in my chain of command?  Well, that's amusing.  You are, but not directly.  If you're considering the idea of ordering me to agree with you, go ahead, but you'll only be disappointed.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you do this to me Dave?  You lead into into a discussion with some civility, like we can actually have a healthy debate, then you get frustrated and say something like "Some of us don't need nannies."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No frustration.  The policies and programs you support show you want the government to run individual lives.
> 
> Don't like it being pointed out bluntly?  Then come down on the side of individual liberty.  Simple, huh?
Click to expand...


What programs do I support?  I haven't mentioned any.

The only things I've expressed in this thread - THE ONLY THINGS - is that 1. You cannot, absolutely cannot, cut your way to a balanced budget without tax increases, and 2. Cutting the budget during 10% unemployment is a bad idea.  I haven't discussed how we got here or what we do when it's over.  Just those 2 points and that's it.  Find a single economist anywhere who disagrees with me and I'll give ya a dollar.


----------



## Intense

magnum said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
Click to expand...


How is that any different than what happened to Bush? You have a short memory. From my perspective, I'm Anti-Statist, nothing personal. I see the Agenda as a threat to the Republic.


----------



## Revere

What is "disgraceful" about opposing someone who wants to dismantle this Constitutional Republic?


----------



## Intense

Well, at least the Tea Party is not deploying 34 War Ships to India. Gee, do you think it's enough??? I don't think it's enough. Let's send more ships.


----------



## Intense

Revere said:


> What is "disgraceful" about opposing someone who wants to dismantle this Constitutional Republic?



There is a Power Base in this Country that pays allot of money to remain Anonymous. I say Fuck them. Let's just boycott Connecticut. Cut them off at the knees. Only Kidding.


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm that's weird, my other employees don't talk to me that way.  But I digress.
> 
> 
> 
> You think you're in my chain of command?  Well, that's amusing.  You are, but not directly.  If you're considering the idea of ordering me to agree with you, go ahead, but you'll only be disappointed.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you do this to me Dave?  You lead into into a discussion with some civility, like we can actually have a healthy debate, then you get frustrated and say something like "Some of us don't need nannies."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No frustration.  The policies and programs you support show you want the government to run individual lives.
> 
> Don't like it being pointed out bluntly?  Then come down on the side of individual liberty.  Simple, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What programs do I support?  I haven't mentioned any.
> 
> The only things I've expressed in this thread - THE ONLY THINGS - is that 1. You cannot, absolutely cannot, cut your way to a balanced budget without tax increases, and 2. Cutting the budget during 10% unemployment is a bad idea.  I haven't discussed how we got here or what we do when it's over.  Just those 2 points and that's it.  Find a single economist anywhere who disagrees with me and I'll give ya a dollar.
Click to expand...


Isn't that how Obama got elected, by doing nothing? I got an idea, let's just vote Present. in 2012 all Democrats should just vote Present. You don't want to be a hypocrite right?

Government should always be trimming the fat. It is part of Governments job. There is rarely a time when that shouldn't be the case.


----------



## rdean

rightwinger said:


> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against



That's hilarious.  Republicans are against education and call college educated "elitists".

8 years under Bush and the nation is damaged for years.  Not a single department or branch that hasn't been messed up.

And right wingers with their "slogans" and "sound bytes" are going to "what"?  

"Stop the spending"?

"Make jobs"?

"Do things"?

So far, the only plan put forth by their leadership is "get Obama".  I'm pretty sure that's the extent of their "ideas".

Sorry, I forgot "cut taxes".  Of course, if you don't have a job, what does that matter?  Shhhh, don't tell them that.  They haven't figured it out.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is that any different than what happened to Bush? You have a short memory. From my perspective, I'm Anti-Statist, nothing personal. I see the Agenda as a threat to the Republic.
Click to expand...


After being installed by Scalia, in a "one time never to be used again emergency decision" after he lost the popular vote..he was treated pretty well. Then he went on to roll over Democrats with tax cuts projected to blow a hole in the budget even with the Clinton surplus. They still wanted to work with him. And he went on to kiboshing international missile treaties and pissing off the Chinese and Russians.

Sheesh..I was there..

No Democrat was calling him the name Republicans called both Clinton and Obama.


----------



## Intense

Sallow said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is that any different than what happened to Bush? You have a short memory. From my perspective, I'm Anti-Statist, nothing personal. I see the Agenda as a threat to the Republic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After being installed by Scalia, in a "one time never to be used again emergency decision" after he lost the popular vote..he was treated pretty well. Then he went on to roll over Democrats with tax cuts projected to blow a hole in the budget even with the Clinton surplus. They still wanted to work with him. And he went on to kiboshing international missile treaties and pissing off the Chinese and Russians.
> 
> Sheesh..I was there..
> 
> No Democrat was calling him the name Republicans called both Clinton and Obama.
Click to expand...


He won Florida, he won the first recount. Gore was shameful in the challenge. It hurt the country very deeply. Even Kerry had enough sense to throw in the towel. Bush was trashed from the start by the fringe left. He gave much away to the Left, trying to make peace, Kennedy and others walked all over him. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bush was perfect, he spent way too much trying to appease. You all treated him like shit from the start. Katrina, Louisiana State Government, and Local were the prime reason for all of that loss and suffering.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

rdean said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's hilarious.  Republicans are against education and call college educated "elitists".
> 
> 8 years under Bush and the nation is damaged for years.  Not a single department or branch that hasn't been messed up.
> 
> And right wingers with their "slogans" and "sound bytes" are going to "what"?
> 
> "Stop the spending"?
> 
> "Make jobs"?
> 
> "Do things"?
> 
> So far, the only plan put forth by their leadership is "get Obama".  I'm pretty sure that's the extent of their "ideas".
> 
> Sorry, I forgot "cut taxes".  Of course, if you don't have a job, what does that matter?  Shhhh, don't tell them that.  They haven't figured it out.
Click to expand...


Both of you are a couple of morons.

1. Eliminate the Presidential Election Fund, a federal program that provides matching funds to political candidates during Presidential primaries, certain third-party candidates, and funds for political conventions. In the 2008 Presidential election the candidates raised over $1.3 billion from individuals and PACs; do they really need to supplement that with taxpayer money?

2. Prohibiting taxpayer-subsidized union activities by prohibiting federal employees from being paid by the government for performing union functions.  Currently some federal employees spend up to 100% of their workweek, paid by taxpayers, doing work for their union. Federal employees unions collect millions in revenue each year and spend significant amounts on political activities and lobbying; should they also be subsidized by the taxpayer for their official functions?

3. Terminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development program that provides individuals with $25,000 stipends for completing their doctoral dissertations. Recently taxpayers have financed research on media strategies for housing policy and the use of eminent domain for urban redevelopment. Why should families who are struggling to pay for their children&#8217;s college also be asked to fund stipends from the government for those who want to write their dissertation on certain government-preferred policies?

4. Terminate the new alternative welfare program, recently created to incentivize states to increase their welfare caseloads without requiring able-bodied adults to work, get job training, or otherwise prepare to move off of taxpayer assistance. Reforming the welfare program was one of the great achievements of the Republican Congress in the mid 1990s, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and ending the cycle of dependency on welfare.  This new program ushered in by Democrats is merely a backdoor way to undo those reforms.

5. Focus federal economic development assistance on areas of need. The Community Development Block Grant program currently funds a wide range of local economic development activities. While it is advertised as a way to help low-income communities, funds are also dispersed to communities with income well-above the national average. A recent study found that the community of Newton, Massachusetts, with a per capita income over twice the national average, was receiving $28 per person in CDBG funds. At the same time, other communities with income 25% below the national average were receiving $10 per person.

There they are: five simple ways to begin to talk about saving money.

Brought to you by Eric Cantor

Now I'm off to to feed my horses!


----------



## rdean

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is that any different than what happened to Bush? You have a short memory. From my perspective, I'm Anti-Statist, nothing personal. I see the Agenda as a threat to the Republic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After being installed by Scalia, in a "one time never to be used again emergency decision" after he lost the popular vote..he was treated pretty well. Then he went on to roll over Democrats with tax cuts projected to blow a hole in the budget even with the Clinton surplus. They still wanted to work with him. And he went on to kiboshing international missile treaties and pissing off the Chinese and Russians.
> 
> Sheesh..I was there..
> 
> No Democrat was calling him the name Republicans called both Clinton and Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He won Florida, he won the first recount. Gore was shameful in the challenge. It hurt the country very deeply. Even Kerry had enough sense to throw in the towel. Bush was trashed from the start by the fringe left. He gave much away to the Left, trying to make peace, Kennedy and others walked all over him. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bush was perfect, he spent way too much trying to appease. You all treated him like shit from the start. Katrina, Louisiana State Government, and Local were the prime reason for all of that loss and suffering.
Click to expand...


What did Bush "give away"?  EPA and OSHA regulations?  Oil leases with subsidies for oil companies?  No bid contracts to "pals"?  2.4 trillion in tax breaks, with 52% going to the top 1%?

Bush was raised under Right wing ideology and practised it perfectly.  Everything he did was right out of the Republican playbook, page by page.  This is a failed ideology.  They failed for 8 years under Bush and this bunch are going to be "different" how?

The world won't come to an end, but the hole will be much deeper to climb out of.


----------



## Sallow

Intense said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is that any different than what happened to Bush? You have a short memory. From my perspective, I'm Anti-Statist, nothing personal. I see the Agenda as a threat to the Republic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After being installed by Scalia, in a "one time never to be used again emergency decision" after he lost the popular vote..he was treated pretty well. Then he went on to roll over Democrats with tax cuts projected to blow a hole in the budget even with the Clinton surplus. They still wanted to work with him. And he went on to kiboshing international missile treaties and pissing off the Chinese and Russians.
> 
> Sheesh..I was there..
> 
> No Democrat was calling him the name Republicans called both Clinton and Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He won Florida, he won the first recount. Gore was shameful in the challenge. It hurt the country very deeply. Even Kerry had enough sense to throw in the towel. Bush was trashed from the start by the fringe left. He gave much away to the Left, trying to make peace, Kennedy and others walked all over him. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bush was perfect, he spent way too much trying to appease. You all treated him like shit from the start. Katrina, Louisiana State Government, and Local were the prime reason for all of that loss and suffering.
Click to expand...


Florida was suspect from the beginning. His BROTHER was the governor and his campaign manager was Secretary of State. 

And Louisiana was overwhelmed, and it looks like it may well have been a screwup cause by work the Army core of engineers were involved in. In any case..leaving people, in this country, in floods like that..to lanquish and die..over 1,000 of them, was a national disgrace. If President Bush had someone like James Witt at the Helm of FEMA instead of his good friend "Heckva job Brownie"..things probably would have been handled with a great deal more professionalism.


----------



## Revere

Uh, James Witt was Louisiana's "boots on the ground" guy in the aftermath of Katrina.


----------



## rdean

Lonestar_logic said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your campaigns were full of rhetoric and bumper sticker slogans. Now that you have actually been elected it is time to put some meat on those bones.
> 
> Its easy to say "cut spending" "eliminate waste" "end earmarks"....now you have to actually do it. What are you going to cut? What will be the impact of those cuts? What will happen if they cut the Social Security, Medicare ?
> 
> How does a Tea Party candidate get things done in Washington?  It is still the same old city.
> 
> I think they are in for a rude awakening and will be the same old Washington insiders they campaigned so hard against
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's hilarious.  Republicans are against education and call college educated "elitists".
> 
> 8 years under Bush and the nation is damaged for years.  Not a single department or branch that hasn't been messed up.
> 
> And right wingers with their "slogans" and "sound bytes" are going to "what"?
> 
> "Stop the spending"?
> 
> "Make jobs"?
> 
> "Do things"?
> 
> So far, the only plan put forth by their leadership is "get Obama".  I'm pretty sure that's the extent of their "ideas".
> 
> Sorry, I forgot "cut taxes".  Of course, if you don't have a job, what does that matter?  Shhhh, don't tell them that.  They haven't figured it out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Both of you are a couple of morons.
> 
> 1. Eliminate the Presidential Election Fund, a federal program that provides matching funds to political candidates during Presidential primaries, certain third-party candidates, and funds for political conventions. In the 2008 Presidential election the candidates raised over $1.3 billion from individuals and PACs; do they really need to supplement that with taxpayer money?
> 
> 2. Prohibiting taxpayer-subsidized union activities by prohibiting federal employees from being paid by the government for performing union functions.  Currently some federal employees spend up to 100% of their workweek, paid by taxpayers, doing work for their union. Federal employees unions collect millions in revenue each year and spend significant amounts on political activities and lobbying; should they also be subsidized by the taxpayer for their official functions?
> 
> 3. Terminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development program that provides individuals with $25,000 stipends for completing their doctoral dissertations. Recently taxpayers have financed research on media strategies for housing policy and the use of eminent domain for urban redevelopment. Why should families who are struggling to pay for their children&#8217;s college also be asked to fund stipends from the government for those who want to write their dissertation on certain government-preferred policies?
> 
> 4. Terminate the new alternative welfare program, recently created to incentivize states to increase their welfare caseloads without requiring able-bodied adults to work, get job training, or otherwise prepare to move off of taxpayer assistance. Reforming the welfare program was one of the great achievements of the Republican Congress in the mid 1990s, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and ending the cycle of dependency on welfare.  This new program ushered in by Democrats is merely a backdoor way to undo those reforms.
> 
> 5. Focus federal economic development assistance on areas of need. The Community Development Block Grant program currently funds a wide range of local economic development activities. While it is advertised as a way to help low-income communities, funds are also dispersed to communities with income well-above the national average. A recent study found that the community of Newton, Massachusetts, with a per capita income over twice the national average, was receiving $28 per person in CDBG funds. At the same time, other communities with income 25% below the national average were receiving $10 per person.
> 
> There they are: five simple ways to begin to talk about saving money.
> 
> Brought to you by Eric Cantor
> 
> Now I'm off to to feed my horses!
Click to expand...


Have you noticed that every one of his ideas is about some way to screw the poor?  Nothing about jobs.  Nothing about raising revenue.  Just "screw the poor" and "don't pay for education".

This is the Republican reality.  

They might as well just use that as a slogan.

Obama, "Yes we can!"

GOP, "Screw the Poor!"

&#8220;My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You&#8217;re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don&#8217;t think too much further than that. And so what you&#8217;ve got to do is you&#8217;ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don&#8217;t know any better.&#8221;

&#8211; Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina
and candidate for S.C. governor

The Andre Bauer solution: Starve the poor, they&#8217;ll stop breeding


----------



## Revere

rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.



Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new.  No ideas.

If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.

Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.


----------



## daveman

Synthaholic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt.  Now tell that to Congress.  Tell, say, Orin Hatch that we don't need that facility/base/manufacturer/etc. in Utah any longer.  Do you think he's going to say "sure - whatever is best for our military and our country"?
> 
> 
> 
> If DoD decides we don't need the base or the equipment produced by the factory in Utah, then Hatch had best go along with it.  DoD knows how better to manage our nation's defense than any Congressman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think we agree.  But how do you force Hatch to "go along with it"?  There is just as much arrogance on the Right as on the Left when it comes to Congressional Lifers.  For every Rangel there is a Hatch.  For every Dingel there is a McCain.  For every Feinstein there is an Inhofe.
Click to expand...


You force them to go along with it by voting them out if they don't.  

People need to make it clear to our representatives that they work for us.  How many Congressmen do you hear refer to themselves as "Representative"?  Those who call themselves Congressmen have forgotten they work for us, not the other way around.

We elect these people to represent, not lead.  I don't want a leader.  I'm a citizen, not a subject.


----------



## daveman

Synthaholic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> No need to pick up the magazine. There is a link.
> 
> Balance the Budget Findings - How to Balance the Federal Budget - Esquire
> 
> And they recommend that the current Health Care Reform Package remain as is..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the Tea Party read Esquire???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does the tea party read?
Click to expand...

Chances are they read more than you.

It makes a funny sound when leftist memes and reality collide.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm that's weird, my other employees don't talk to me that way.  But I digress.
> 
> 
> 
> You think you're in my chain of command?  Well, that's amusing.  You are, but not directly.  If you're considering the idea of ordering me to agree with you, go ahead, but you'll only be disappointed.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you do this to me Dave?  You lead into into a discussion with some civility, like we can actually have a healthy debate, then you get frustrated and say something like "Some of us don't need nannies."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No frustration.  The policies and programs you support show you want the government to run individual lives.
> 
> Don't like it being pointed out bluntly?  Then come down on the side of individual liberty.  Simple, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What programs do I support?  I haven't mentioned any.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet your dollar below that you vote straight D without a moment's consideration.


Cuyo said:


> The only things I've expressed in this thread - THE ONLY THINGS - is that 1. You cannot, absolutely cannot, cut your way to a balanced budget without tax increases, and 2. Cutting the budget during 10% unemployment is a bad idea.  I haven't discussed how we got here or what we do when it's over.  Just those 2 points and that's it.  Find a single economist anywhere who disagrees with me and I'll give ya a dollar.


You do realize, don't you, that the current state of the budget is partly responsible for the 10% unemployment?


----------



## rightwinger

Revere said:


> What is "disgraceful" about opposing someone who wants to dismantle this Constitutional Republic?



Gee...I never realized the country was in danger of being dismantled


----------



## Cuyo

daveman said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think you're in my chain of command?  Well, that's amusing.  You are, but not directly.  If you're considering the idea of ordering me to agree with you, go ahead, but you'll only be disappointed.
> 
> No frustration.  The policies and programs you support show you want the government to run individual lives.
> 
> Don't like it being pointed out bluntly?  Then come down on the side of individual liberty.  Simple, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What programs do I support?  I haven't mentioned any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm willing to bet your dollar below that you vote straight D without a moment's consideration.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only things I've expressed in this thread - THE ONLY THINGS - is that 1. You cannot, absolutely cannot, cut your way to a balanced budget without tax increases, and 2. Cutting the budget during 10% unemployment is a bad idea.  I haven't discussed how we got here or what we do when it's over.  Just those 2 points and that's it.  Find a single economist anywhere who disagrees with me and I'll give ya a dollar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize, don't you, that the current state of the budget is partly responsible for the 10% unemployment?
Click to expand...


I disagree, and I'd be happy to take you to task in another thread.  But right now, we're talking about what to do, right now.

Do you agree, yes or no, that we cannot balance the budget without tax increases?

-and-

Do you agree, yes or no, that cutting government jobs right now is a bad idea?


----------



## Intense

rdean said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new.  No ideas.
> 
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
Click to expand...


How much you want for Trent Lott, Lindsey Graham, John McCain? Make an offer. 

They think like you anyway, why not make it official??? 

Yes They are just like you.


----------



## rightwinger

Intense said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new.  No ideas.
> 
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How much you want for Trent Lott, Lindsey Graham, John McCain? Make an offer.
> 
> They think like you anyway, why not make it official???
> 
> Yes They are just like you.
Click to expand...


Damn RINOs...but they vote Republican


----------



## Intense

Cuyo said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> What programs do I support?  I haven't mentioned any.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm willing to bet your dollar below that you vote straight D without a moment's consideration.
> 
> 
> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only things I've expressed in this thread - THE ONLY THINGS - is that 1. You cannot, absolutely cannot, cut your way to a balanced budget without tax increases, and 2. Cutting the budget during 10% unemployment is a bad idea.  I haven't discussed how we got here or what we do when it's over.  Just those 2 points and that's it.  Find a single economist anywhere who disagrees with me and I'll give ya a dollar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize, don't you, that the current state of the budget is partly responsible for the 10% unemployment?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree, and I'd be happy to take you to task in another thread.  But right now, we're talking about what to do, right now.
> 
> Do you agree, yes or no, that we cannot balance the budget without tax increases?
> 
> -and-
> 
> Do you agree, yes or no, that cutting government jobs right now is a bad idea?
Click to expand...


We can balance the budget without Tax Increases. Yes We Can! You don't mind if we borrow that, do you? Thanks! Yes We Can Balance The Budget Without Increasing Taxes.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1CLjF8Q8xo[/ame]


----------



## Jroc

magnum said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
Click to expand...


What the hell do you know about it? you live in The UK. Have you read the stupid health care bill?.....Well neither has Obama, and most of congress. Get off of that stupid racist crap, Obama is opposed becouse of his expanding of the federal the government and a lot of the things hes doing are unconstitutional. Oh... thats right.. You guys don't have one of those... Too Bad we can't trade, you can have Obama since you love him so much.... we'll take David Cameron.



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ9LpnqDOVo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ9LpnqDOVo[/ame]


----------



## Jroc

rdean said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new. * No ideas*.
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
Click to expand...


HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?


The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans


----------



## rdean

Jroc said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> rdung is a complete waste of time.  He posts the same shit in every thread.  Bush, Bush, Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new. * No ideas*.
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?
> 
> 
> The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans
Click to expand...


You're the fucking idiot moron.  Did you read that trash?

I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.

But the worst is that inter state thing.  Why do you think they want to do that?  Think about it.  Think real hard.  Let me give you a minute.









Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".

And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:

Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.

So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?

I'm not going to read the rest of this bullshit.  It's too damn dumb.


----------



## Intense

rightwinger said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new.  No ideas.
> 
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How much you want for Trent Lott, Lindsey Graham, John McCain? Make an offer.
> 
> They think like you anyway, why not make it official???
> 
> Yes They are just like you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn RINOs...but they vote Republican
Click to expand...


They Vote Country Club Republican. How much campaigning did they do as opposed to Tea Party Criticism. Who caves all the time and by doing so create the illusion that there is no difference between the Parties? Parties aside, Who champions Unalienable Right's including Liberty as opposed to State Rule and Expansion.


----------



## daveman

Cuyo said:


> I disagree, and I'd be happy to take you to task in another thread.


You're welcome to make the attempt.  Don't get your hopes up.



Cuyo said:


> But right now, we're talking about what to do, right now.
> 
> Do you agree, yes or no, that we cannot balance the budget without tax increases?
> 
> -and-
> 
> Do you agree, yes or no, that cutting government jobs right now is a bad idea?


No and no.


----------



## daveman

rdean said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's the SAME Republican Party doing the SAME old shit.  Nothing new. * No ideas*.
> If you guys have ideas you should say what they are.  Come on now.  MAN UP.  Quit whining.
> 
> Look at Cantors ideas.  Screw the poor.  That's it.  That's the plan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?
> 
> 
> The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're the fucking idiot moron.  Did you read that trash?
> 
> I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.
> 
> But the worst is that inter state thing.  Why do you think they want to do that?  Think about it.  Think real hard.  Let me give you a minute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".
> 
> And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:
> 
> Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.
> 
> So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?
> 
> I'm not going to read the rest of this bullshit.  It's too damn dumb.
Click to expand...

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean no ideas have been presented.

But tomorrow you'll be back screeching the same old lie, won't you?


----------



## Jroc

rdean said:


> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?
> 
> 
> The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans



I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.[/QUOTE]

OK.....the pools are meant to spread the additional cost does not have anything to do with level of care idiot   





> Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".



Look idiot... why do different states need all those different regulations and mandates anyway? You should be able to choose what kind of coverage you want, not what the government says you must have... Get it?... Whats the problem? Oh wait a minute.... I guess it would be a problem for people like you, who want big daddy governement telling you how you must live you're life 







> And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:
> 
> Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.
> 
> So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?



"For example, assuming historical rates of return, if individuals born in 1970 were allowed to invest in stocks the amount they currently pay in Social Security taxes, those individuals could receive nearly six times the benefits that they are scheduled to receive under Social Security, as much as $11,729 per month. Even a low-wage earner would receive nearly three times the return on Social Security."

Retiring with Dignity: Social Security vs. Private Markets


You don't invest in friken day trading you idiot... they are invested in safe Municipal Bonds and mutual funds like a 401k, Get it through you're head genus.. Social Security can not be sustained as it is, plus you can't build any wealth through that stupid ponzie sceem, this way you can build wealth thats you own not wait for a stupid governemtn check that you can barley live on


----------



## rdean

daveman said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?
> 
> 
> The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're the fucking idiot moron.  Did you read that trash?
> 
> I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.
> 
> But the worst is that inter state thing.  Why do you think they want to do that?  Think about it.  Think real hard.  Let me give you a minute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".
> 
> And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:
> 
> Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.
> 
> So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?
> 
> I'm not going to read the rest of this bullshit.  It's too damn dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because you don't like it doesn't mean no ideas have been presented.
> 
> But tomorrow you'll be back screeching the same old lie, won't you?
Click to expand...


These are not NEW ideas.  They are old, discredited ideas. 

Now, tell me YOU liked them. 

Should I go through the rest?  Will they be any more brilliant than these?

You know that "interstate insurance" is the best.  In fact, if you could buy insurance in California and live in Virginia that would be even better.  What do you want to bet that if companies start selling insurance across state lines, no company would sell in their home state?  Why?  So they could avoid every single regulation.  

Then they will be regulated by the federal government.  Which of course, would lead to more government.

There is no positive spin to put on this.  It's just too damn dumb.


----------



## rdean

Jroc said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS BEFORE ONE OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS LOOK AT IT?
> 
> 
> The Roadmap Plan | A Roadmap for America's Future | The Budget Committee Republicans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.
Click to expand...


OK.....the pools are meant to spread the additional cost does not have anything to do with level of care idiot   





> Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".



Look idiot... why do different states need all those different regulations and mandates anyway? You should be able to choose what kind of coverage you want, not what the government says you must have... Get it?... Whats the problem? Oh wait a minute.... I guess it would be a problem for people like you, who want big daddy governement telling you how you must live you're life 







> And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:
> 
> Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.
> 
> So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?



"For example, assuming historical rates of return, if individuals born in 1970 were allowed to invest in stocks the amount they currently pay in Social Security taxes, those individuals could receive nearly six times the benefits that they are scheduled to receive under Social Security, as much as $11,729 per month. Even a low-wage earner would receive nearly three times the return on Social Security."

Retiring with Dignity: Social Security vs. Private Markets

Quote Atribute Edited by Intense
Jroc[/quote] You don't invest in friken day trading you idiot... they are invested in safe Municipal Bonds and mutual funds like a 401k, Get it through you're head genus.. Social Security can not be sustained as it is, plus you can't build any wealth through that stupid ponzie sceem, this way you can build wealth thats you own not wait for a stupid governemtn check that you can barley live on[/QUOTE]

My 401 lost half it's value when Republicans changed the laws moving 70% of the mortgage market to Wall Street.  Seems those brainiacs sold mortgages to anyone who could sign their name, bundled the mortgages and sold them overseas as "securities".

Wait, it gets even better.

They insured those "securities" knowing they would tank.  Then when they did, collected the insurance money which they called "derivatives".  That is what brought down the nation's largest insurance companies.  How come almost no one went to jail?  Because the industry was newly deregulated by business minded Republicans.  Good for their greedy little hearts.  And now they are BACK in office.  And Wall Street is still unregulated and likely to remain so.

Hope you have more than a 401.  They aren't through yet.  You watch.


----------



## Jroc

rdean said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're the fucking idiot moron.  Did you read that trash?
> 
> I started with that joke of a health care plan.  So what happens is there are two pools of people.  Healthy and the sick.  When you separate them, you end up with unequal treatment.
> 
> But the worst is that inter state thing.  Why do you think they want to do that?  Think about it.  Think real hard.  Let me give you a minute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, the reason health care companies want the "interstate" option is because Virginia can't regulate health care from New York.  Get it?  They will screw over people worse than they do now because you will get the cheapest health care that will also be completely unregulated.  We call that, "Getting royally fucked".
> 
> And look at this.  This is from the "Social Security" section:
> 
> Guarantee of Contributions. Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation. With the recent market downturn, individuals must be assured their retirement is secure. By guaranteeing the dollars put into an account, individuals can be assured that a large-scale market downturn will not cost them their Social Security personal accounts.
> 
> So you put money into "accounts" that can be used in the "stock market" and if you lose it, the government or someone will insure it?  So you will never lose it?  Only make "wealth"??????  Does this sound anything like reality?
> 
> I'm not going to read the rest of this bullshit.  It's too damn dumb.
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you don't like it doesn't mean no ideas have been presented.
> 
> But tomorrow you'll be back screeching the same old lie, won't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> These are not NEW ideas.  They are old, discredited ideas.
> 
> Now, tell me YOU liked them.
> 
> Should I go through the rest?  Will they be any more brilliant than these?
> 
> You know that "interstate insurance" is the best.  In fact, if you could buy insurance in California and live in Virginia that would be even better.  What do you want to bet that if companies start selling insurance across state lines, no company would sell in their home state?  Why?  So they could avoid every single regulation.
> 
> Then they will be regulated by the federal government.  Which of course, would lead to more government.
> 
> There is no positive spin to put on this.  It's just too damn dumb.
Click to expand...




Bull.. the "old discredited idea" is government run Health care, it doesn't work, it can never work. Have you read the health care law? do you know what's in it, I doubt it... I for one don't want to go to some government Bureaucrat begging for my health care. Government can't run a friken thing right, if you want to put you're life in thier hands, then you're a fool,


----------



## Jroc

rdean said:


> [My 401 lost half it's value when Republicans changed the laws moving 70% of the mortgage market to Wall Street.  Seems those brainiacs sold mortgages to anyone who could sign their name, bundled the mortgages and sold them overseas as "securities".
> 
> Wait, it gets even better.
> 
> They insured those "securities" knowing they would tank.  Then when they did, collected the insurance money which they called "derivatives".  That is what brought down the nation's largest insurance companies.  How come almost no one went to jail?  Because the industry was newly deregulated by business minded Republicans.  Good for their greedy little hearts.  And now they are BACK in office.  And Wall Street is still unregulated and likely to remain so.
> 
> Hope you have more than a 401.  They aren't through yet.  You watch.




retirement is for LONG TERM INVESTMENTS..you can't just look at 5 or even ten years, the market goes up ,it goes down, but over the long term it's always a better investment then Social Security, not even close. and in case you didn't notice Obama is surrounded by wall street people, more then I've ever seem in the Whitehouse, wallstreet loves big governement. That way they just get in Bed with government officials and get whatever deals they can get   "Croney Capitalism...


*Stossel On Crony Capitalism Part 1 *


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sSg0xjzIec"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sSg0xjzIec[/ame]


----------



## magnum

Jroc said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What the hell do you know about it? you live in The UK. Have you read the stupid health care bill?.....Well neither has Obama, and most of congress. Get off of that stupid racist crap, Obama is opposed becouse of his expanding of the federal the government and a lot of the things hes doing are unconstitutional. Oh... thats right.. You guys don't have one of those... Too Bad we can't trade, you can have Obama since you love him so much.... we'll take David Cameron.
Click to expand...


I wish Obama was the Prime Minister here, but he don't like us Brits.


----------



## Jroc

magnum said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's been opposed at every turn, never given a chance to do what he set out to. The Republicans have been disgraceful in their treatment of the man. Maybe it's not a colour thing, but they have let their hatred of Obama cloud any co-operation that could have been achieved. For instance, the vile lies about healthcare which led to the public option fiasco.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell do you know about it? you live in The UK. Have you read the stupid health care bill?.....Well neither has Obama, and most of congress. Get off of that stupid racist crap, Obama is opposed becouse of his expanding of the federal the government and a lot of the things hes doing are unconstitutional. Oh... thats right.. You guys don't have one of those... Too Bad we can't trade, you can have Obama since you love him so much.... we'll take David Cameron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wish Obama was the Prime Minister here, but he don't like us Brits.
Click to expand...



How easy people can be fooled by a demagogue..

Between the election and the economy, Americans are a little emotional these days. Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the faces of Obama supporters at rallies. On the eve of the election, there's excitement, as evidenced in Friday's "O-Bama Faces" slideshow, and there's exhaustion. And sometimes there's just crying. 




















Tears For Obama (PHOTOS)


----------



## rightwinger

Jroc said:


> magnum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell do you know about it? you live in The UK. Have you read the stupid health care bill?.....Well neither has Obama, and most of congress. Get off of that stupid racist crap, Obama is opposed becouse of his expanding of the federal the government and a lot of the things hes doing are unconstitutional. Oh... thats right.. You guys don't have one of those... Too Bad we can't trade, you can have Obama since you love him so much.... we'll take David Cameron.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Obama was the Prime Minister here, but he don't like us Brits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How easy people can be fooled by a demagogue..
> 
> Between the election and the economy, Americans are a little emotional these days. Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the faces of Obama supporters at rallies. On the eve of the election, there's excitement, as evidenced in Friday's "O-Bama Faces" slideshow, and there's exhaustion. And sometimes there's just crying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tears For Obama (PHOTOS)
Click to expand...


----------



## Intense

Gettin to be a real tearfest here.... Huh.... Let me know if there is anything I can do.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

rdean said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's hilarious.  Republicans are against education and call college educated "elitists".
> 
> 8 years under Bush and the nation is damaged for years.  Not a single department or branch that hasn't been messed up.
> 
> And right wingers with their "slogans" and "sound bytes" are going to "what"?
> 
> "Stop the spending"?
> 
> "Make jobs"?
> 
> "Do things"?
> 
> So far, the only plan put forth by their leadership is "get Obama".  I'm pretty sure that's the extent of their "ideas".
> 
> Sorry, I forgot "cut taxes".  Of course, if you don't have a job, what does that matter?  Shhhh, don't tell them that.  They haven't figured it out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both of you are a couple of morons.
> 
> 1. Eliminate the Presidential Election Fund, a federal program that provides matching funds to political candidates during Presidential primaries, certain third-party candidates, and funds for political conventions. In the 2008 Presidential election the candidates raised over $1.3 billion from individuals and PACs; do they really need to supplement that with taxpayer money?
> 
> 2. Prohibiting taxpayer-subsidized union activities by prohibiting federal employees from being paid by the government for performing union functions.  Currently some federal employees spend up to 100% of their workweek, paid by taxpayers, doing work for their union. Federal employees unions collect millions in revenue each year and spend significant amounts on political activities and lobbying; should they also be subsidized by the taxpayer for their official functions?
> 
> 3. Terminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development program that provides individuals with $25,000 stipends for completing their doctoral dissertations. Recently taxpayers have financed research on media strategies for housing policy and the use of eminent domain for urban redevelopment. Why should families who are struggling to pay for their childrens college also be asked to fund stipends from the government for those who want to write their dissertation on certain government-preferred policies?
> 
> 4. Terminate the new alternative welfare program, recently created to incentivize states to increase their welfare caseloads without requiring able-bodied adults to work, get job training, or otherwise prepare to move off of taxpayer assistance. Reforming the welfare program was one of the great achievements of the Republican Congress in the mid 1990s, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and ending the cycle of dependency on welfare.  This new program ushered in by Democrats is merely a backdoor way to undo those reforms.
> 
> 5. Focus federal economic development assistance on areas of need. The Community Development Block Grant program currently funds a wide range of local economic development activities. While it is advertised as a way to help low-income communities, funds are also dispersed to communities with income well-above the national average. A recent study found that the community of Newton, Massachusetts, with a per capita income over twice the national average, was receiving $28 per person in CDBG funds. At the same time, other communities with income 25% below the national average were receiving $10 per person.
> 
> There they are: five simple ways to begin to talk about saving money.
> 
> Brought to you by Eric Cantor
> 
> Now I'm off to to feed my horses!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you noticed that every one of his ideas is about some way to screw the poor?  Nothing about jobs.  Nothing about raising revenue.  Just "screw the poor" and "don't pay for education".
> 
> This is the Republican reality.
> 
> They might as well just use that as a slogan.
> 
> Obama, "Yes we can!"
> 
> GOP, "Screw the Poor!"
> 
> My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! Youre facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that dont think too much further than that. And so what youve got to do is youve got to curtail that type of behavior. They dont know any better.
> 
>  Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolina
> and candidate for S.C. governor
> 
> The Andre Bauer solution: Starve the poor, theyll stop breeding
Click to expand...


Explain how each of these things "screw the poor".

Each of these things are budget cutting items and though not all will raise revenue it damn sure will save us some serious money.

Show me in the Constitution where you are entitled to an education, housing, healthcare etc...

Andre Bauer's grandma is a smart woman.


----------



## Mad Scientist

rightwinger said:


> *OK Tea Party....Time to belly up to the bar*


How about *not* "bellying up to the bar" but instead *stay sober* for the next two years by not engaging in drunken spending sprees?


----------



## Bill Angel

Lonestar_logic said:


> Show me in the Constitution where you are entitled to an education, housing, healthcare etc...



What about that famous quote from the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It is much easier to pursue one's unalienable Right of achieving happiness if one has the support of a decent education, housing, and health care.


----------



## rightwinger

Bill Angel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me in the Constitution where you are entitled to an education, housing, healthcare etc...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about that famous quote from the Declaration of Independence:
> 
> "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
> 
> It is much easier to pursue one's unalienable Right of achieving happiness if one has the support of a decent education, housing, and health care.
Click to expand...


----------



## Dante

Bill Angel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me in the Constitution where you are entitled to an education, housing, healthcare etc...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about that famous quote from the Declaration of Independence:
> 
> "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
> 
> It is much easier to pursue one's unalienable Right of achieving happiness if one has the support of a decent education, housing, and health care.
Click to expand...


Look up the definition of 'logic' for a lonestar stater


----------



## Intense

Bill Angel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me in the Constitution where you are entitled to an education, housing, healthcare etc...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about that famous quote from the Declaration of Independence:
> 
> "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
> 
> It is much easier to pursue one's unalienable Right of achieving happiness if one has the support of a decent education, housing, and health care.
Click to expand...


That's definitely something to *Work* for. I like that. Guess what the Action word is here?


----------



## Jroc

Bill Angel said:


> It is much easier to pursue one's unalienable Right of achieving happiness if one has the support of a decent education, housing, and health care.




Yeah...And the sooner we get the federal government out of it the Better...Making all those kids go to failing schools....So sad.


----------

