• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Forward To Tired Old Liberalism

nancy pelosi, speaker of the house, banger of the giant gavel, leader of the caucus, one third of single party control of the united states govt, prodigious fundraiser, known for the iron hand wielding the fearsome whip, cat o nine tails...

merely one member?

Yah, she is one person. I don't think a single dumb statement by her changes the definition of liberalism.

to cram via senate reconciliation a radical reform of the entire united states health care system, one sixth of the economy, relied upon like life itself by seniors and children and moms who are married and moms who are single...

I think its hard to call the reform radical. Even if it was Romney still supported it in MA, so you can't say he is all that much ideologically different than the liberals. You also have to remember that the individual mandate was originally a conservative idea and was supported by the Heritage foundation.

As for the whole senate reconciliation thing, the republicans used that tactic to push for major legislation as well Ezra Klein - Did Republicans use reconciliation for significantly bipartisan bills? . Today a significant portion of our debt is due to the Bush tax cuts which were pushed through with reconciliation.

Both parties have abused reconciliation and the filibuster. To say one party is worse than the other is splitting hairs.

why, the dame was damn near set to DEEM the dumb thing

House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it

one sixth of the economy, vital lifeblood, as critical to the household as air

Democrats Reid, Pelosi prepare to craft Obama's final healthcare bill behind closed doors - latimes.com

obama promised transparency

The reason people were excited about Obama's transparency was because the Bush administration was incredibly secretive. I won't disagree with you that Obama and anyone who defends him should be ashamed because the way that healthcare bill was put together was awful. However that doesn't erase the lack of transparency in the Bush administration and the fact that Romney and Ryan haven't done much to indicate they would do much different.

This is a decent article that explains how similar Bush and Obama have been similarly despicable. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/opinion/27stone.html?pagewanted=all

but you can't sidestep the consequences, at least not outside your own precious little narcissistic musings

Why so hostile? I think there are incredibly dangerous consequences for what Obama has done over the past few years. He has made the strengthening of the security state and the destruction of juridical rights bi-partisan when they were once only upheld by conservatives.

michelle bachmann and the boston slave trade?

LOL!

why even contemplate a point so insignificant and microscopic it can only be seen as purely petty and personal

Because the person I was responding to asked if a republican had said something as dumb as what Pelosi said. You would think Bachmann would know the very basics of American history if she thought one of the bigger problems with our country was that we were moving away from the beliefs of the founding fathers. It is painfully idiotic that she didn't know how the founding fathers acted towards slavery.

I do agree that dumb petty statements by individuals don't necessarily have a bearing on the major issues. That is why I thought it was dumb that Another Lurker thought the pure stupidity of Another Luker's statement didn't constitute some huge ideological difference.

there is a campaign going on over the macro direction of a whole lot more than one sixth of the still most crucial economy on the planet

if major budget reform is not enacted immediately, our precious social programs---social security, medicare and medicaid, as well as public pensions---will simply not exist for our next generation, at least not in the form we've all come to expect

leadership is required

ie, a quarterback not a pusillanimous punter

Of course leadership is required. The problem is that the likely leaders of this country seem to have very similar ideologies.
 
Yah, she is one person. I don't think a single dumb statement by her changes the definition of liberalism.



I think its hard to call the reform radical. Even if it was Romney still supported it in MA, so you can't say he is all that much ideologically different than the liberals. You also have to remember that the individual mandate was originally a conservative idea and was supported by the Heritage foundation.

As for the whole senate reconciliation thing, the republicans used that tactic to push for major legislation as well Ezra Klein - Did Republicans use reconciliation for significantly bipartisan bills? . Today a significant portion of our debt is due to the Bush tax cuts which were pushed through with reconciliation.

Both parties have abused reconciliation and the filibuster. To say one party is worse than the other is splitting hairs.



The reason people were excited about Obama's transparency was because the Bush administration was incredibly secretive. I won't disagree with you that Obama and anyone who defends him should be ashamed because the way that healthcare bill was put together was awful. However that doesn't erase the lack of transparency in the Bush administration and the fact that Romney and Ryan haven't done much to indicate they would do much different.

This is a decent article that explains how similar Bush and Obama have been similarly despicable. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/opinion/27stone.html?pagewanted=all



Why so hostile? I think there are incredibly dangerous consequences for what Obama has done over the past few years. He has made the strengthening of the security state and the destruction of juridical rights bi-partisan when they were once only upheld by conservatives.



Because the person I was responding to asked if a republican had said something as dumb as what Pelosi said. You would think Bachmann would know the very basics of American history if she thought one of the bigger problems with our country was that we were moving away from the beliefs of the founding fathers. It is painfully idiotic that she didn't know how the founding fathers acted towards slavery.

I do agree that dumb petty statements by individuals don't necessarily have a bearing on the major issues. That is why I thought it was dumb that Another Lurker thought the pure stupidity of Another Luker's statement didn't constitute some huge ideological difference.



Of course leadership is required. The problem is that the likely leaders of this country seem to have very similar ideologies.

So...your whole rebuttal to The Prof's post boils down to: "The Republicans did it worse"?
 
So...your whole rebuttal to The Prof's post boils down to: "The Republicans did it worse"?

Where did I say that?

My rebuttal is in defense of my original position in this thread. Neither party in its actions over the last decade have really distinguished itself ideologically over the other. Obama gave us some great rhetoric against the Bush administration but his actions haven't been much different than Bush. In the same way Romney and Ryan have offered plenty of rhetoric against Obama but if you look at their records they have acted in ways similar to what Obama has done (voting for bailouts, supporting individual mandates, supporting useless wars in the middle east).

Trying to argue which party is worse is splitting hairs because they both act essentially the same.
 
a govt that borrows a trillion a year more than it brings in, an 800B stim that creates more debt than jobs, a govt intrusion into health care paid for with middle class taxes and medicare cuts, scores of new restricting rules and regulations...

Thing is the GOP of today is not concerned with paying down the debt or balancing the budget.

Rather, it's concerned with spending cuts and tax exemptions. And paying for government contracts to campaign contributors via government debt.
 
Well when it comes to making policy that what we drill, we use.... guess which party votes against it? Yep... The Grand 'Ol Party. Oil is an international commodity that get's sold on the world market. That means what we drill does NOT get used here. Why? because we pay the least for our oil. Oil companies drill out natural resources and sell them abroad to the highest bidder... so again... What policy can be enacted from your perspective, that will lower our gasoline prices?

Natural gas, CNG vehicles and tanks are starting to get employed in fleet vehicles.
Coal gassification looks like its about to get a green light, if the ****ing EPA would allow the plant to break ground.
Ease EPA regulations to allow the opening of new refineries that would be profitable, currently EPA regulations tighten faster than plants can implement them and stay profitable.
Ease EPA regs on coal plants---its over 20% of our power supply, recently passed by natural gas for the first time ever.
Eliminate ethanol subsidies, the more ethanol you add, the hotter the fuel burns, causing engine damage and reducing MPG.
Allow offshore exploration, increase federal land leases, and increase offshore leases.
Pipeline operations in the northern parts of the country should be completed to allow increases in oil supply through efficient logistics.

Our energy policy is terrible right now. That alone is hurting us.

Our current energy policy is hurting us economically.

What policy could the U.S. pass that would do that?

Turn on the water supply to the Central Valley in California and start to reduce the 17% plus systemic unemployment in the ag counties there that is self inflicted over a damn bait fish.
Start looking around, thats one of the worst, Im sure there are more.
 
Where did I say that?

My rebuttal is in defense of my original position in this thread. Neither party in its actions over the last decade have really distinguished itself ideologically over the other. Obama gave us some great rhetoric against the Bush administration but his actions haven't been much different than Bush. In the same way Romney and Ryan have offered plenty of rhetoric against Obama but if you look at their records they have acted in ways similar to what Obama has done (voting for bailouts, supporting individual mandates, supporting useless wars in the middle east).

Trying to argue which party is worse is splitting hairs because they both act essentially the same.

Thats why the grass roots of the conservative party is primarying their asses all over the place.
 
I saw Obama's 2008 DNC's National Convention. Too bad that guy didn't become president. A lot of thought he did, but quickly learned that person didn't actually exist. Instead we got a Barack Obama from some alternative reality instead.
 
He has made the strengthening of the security state and the destruction of juridical rights bipartisan

obama made the security state bipartisan?

Senate Votes To Block Funds For Guantanamo Closure, 90 to 6

LOL!

over-his-head obama and his corrupt ag make 8

It is painfully idiotic that she didn't know how the founding fathers acted towards slavery

bachmann is not president, never will be

Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States - YouTube

Of course leadership is required

2011: President's budget sinks, 97-0 | TheHill.com

2012: Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate - Washington Times

2012: Obama budget defeated 414-0 in House - Washington Times

Trying to argue which party is worse is splitting hairs because they both act essentially the same

U.S. 2007 Budget Deficit Falls to $163 Billion - Bloomberg
 
Last edited:

If you have the time check out this video Civil Liberties Under Obama | WeAreMany.org I've only watched the first half, but in it Glenn Greenwald shows how Obama has supported and even strengthened many of the methods Bush used to weaken civil liberties and build up the surveillance state. All the democrats who support Obama today will really never be able to argue against these types of abuses like they did under the Bush administration again. The security state can only occur on the back of the strengthening of the executive branch. Democrats freaked out when this process occurred under Bush but they have generally defended Obama.

He also makes the point that Obama basically supported the abhorrent violations that occur in Guantanamo but he just wanted to move the facility elsewhere.

bachmann is not president, never will be

Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States - YouTube

Pelosi will never be president either.

But do you really want to start a dumb statements by presidents contest when you're parties last president was George W. Bush. "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." Bush Never Stops Thinking About New Ways to Harm America - Video Clip

"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB/GYN's aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country." Bush OB/GYN Love - YouTube

"Rarely is the question asked; is our children learning?" Rarely is the question asked... - YouTube


FederalDeficit(1).jpg

FactCheck.org : The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton

I'll give you that Obama hasn't done much good for the debt and deficit. But the republicans have a pretty dismal record themselves.
 
That's a nice non sequitur story. How do you reconcile that sentimental bull**** with Republicans campaigning on cutting funding for schools (Ryan plan), raising taxes on the poor and middle classes (again, see the Ryan plan) and reducing the availability of health care for the poor? (repealing Obamacare)


Not yet, but the Republicans sure are trying their damnedest to cut our bootstraps and shoot economic mobility in the face.

Republicans aren't running on the Ryan plan and even if they were I dont recall any tax hikes in that plan....
 
In most cases it would indeed be redundant to say "lead from the front," but our current leader brags of "leading from behind." Therefore, in the context of the current campaign, it is not redundant to phrase it as I did.
Obama may lead from behind, but Romney leads from his behind. lol
 
Republicans aren't running on the Ryan plan and even if they were I dont recall any tax hikes in that plan....

ryanraisestaxes.jpg
 
Buffett Rule would barely dent debt - CNN.com

there's not enough rich in the milky way to tax our way out

if fundamental budget reform is not enacted immediately, then our precious social programs---social security, medicare and medicaid, as well as public pensions---will simply not be there for our next generation, at least not in the form we've all come to expect

leadership, anyone?
 
Back
Top Bottom