• 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!

Occupy Oakland protesters remove barricade at port entrance

Ikari said:
But those rules are based on government force and you have not outlined any way in which you restrict that force to proper means.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you live but in my state, my county, my city we have this thing called "elections".
 
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
I cannot speak for others, but personally I don't want to end up with a party that bows to the hard-core left or right minority as the GOP has been doing. I don't want my politicians (regardless of party) unduly influenced by the monied institutions. I want the Bush-era tax breaks gone and capital gains taxed at a reasonable rate. I want tax incentives for employers to create jobs in the US and penalties for exporting jobs because without jobs this country will continue to falter. I want the US to quit interfering in the affairs of the rest of the world when we have no legitimate interest in the area (Al Qaeda & the Taliban remain a legitimate interest - they killed our soldiers before the war and thousands within the US). I want basic needs met for everyone - education, food, shelter, healthcare. I want my government to support a business environment that promotes start-ups and innovations instead of promotes the big guys getting bigger / richer and using business models that are best for their bottom line instead of good for this country. I am part of the 99% that are sick and tired of waiting for something to trickle down and my government actually being the government of the rich and powerful instead of the people.
Click to expand...
And yet...you WILL vote for the same people that have been rolling around with the brokers and bankers. You will vote for a guy that just hired as a chief advisor one of the largest lobbyists in the country. You supported a man that took us to war with the Serbs (Clinton) even though they represented no threat to the US interest and a man that does indeed fight Al Qaida, ,uslims in other lands, has expanded black ops prisons, etc. Obama is no different than Bush than Clinton and any other 'president'. Get past the political hype and the crap they spew on the campaign trail, and they do pretty much the exact same thing. This "I am the 99%" crap is a joke. You vote for the same people, regardless of whether or not there is an R or a D after their name. You want to make a difference? LOUDLY proclaim and follow through with your intent to support a third party candidate...one that truly represents the things you stand for. Otherwise...its not a different type of clown in DC..just a clown with a letter (political affiliation) that you like.
 
conservativeguy said:
I don't know where you live but in my state, my county, my city we have this thing called "elections".
Click to expand...

Elections that, more and more, are decided by factors OTHER than a candidates ability to do the job.

Money is the new king. Money decides elections, and since money is now protected free speech or companies that are people...guess who has the most to throw around?

And then you have the fact that states themselves only place certain names on the ballots, regardless of who all are options to pick. There are QUITE a few factors involved in the limiting, and further belittling of the concept of "choice" in american politics.

I don't think anyone can really deny this.
 
This truck driver didnt look to pissed off about the blockage of the port...

 
TheDemSocialist said:
This truck driver didnt look to pissed off about the blockage of the port...

Click to expand...

No, because he was likely paid to NOT work that day. If I am able, willing, and available for work, having shown up, etc, and I was SCHEDULED to work that day, the company I work for is legally required to pay me.
 
KevinKohler said:
No, because he was likely paid to NOT work that day. If I am able, willing, and available for work, having shown up, etc, and I was SCHEDULED to work that day, the company I work for is legally required to pay me.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof that he was paid not to work that day?
I mean if he is a truck driver and he is driving to the port isnt that considered "working" for his job of being a truck driver?
 
conservativeguy said:
I don't know where you live but in my state, my county, my city we have this thing called "elections".
Click to expand...

Elections are not explicit restriction on government force.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you have any proof that he was paid not to work that day?
I mean if he is a truck driver and he is driving to the port isnt that considered "working" for his job of being a truck driver?
Click to expand...

Of course I have no proof. Instead of saying no, I suppose I should have said "maybe".
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you have any proof that he was paid not to work that day?
I mean if he is a truck driver and he is driving to the port isnt that considered "working" for his job of being a truck driver?
Click to expand...
It's pretty obvious he was paid (he's in the truck). It's pretty obvious he wasn't really having to work when the picture was taken (work defined for this purpose as filling the need which created the job for which he was hired).
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you have any proof that he was paid not to work that day?
I mean if he is a truck driver and he is driving to the port isnt that considered "working" for his job of being a truck driver?
Click to expand...

If he is delivering something... he is already at work :)

If one was trying to GET to work, thats a different story.
 
KevinKohler said:
Elections that, more and more, are decided by factors OTHER than a candidates ability to do the job.

Money is the new king. Money decides elections, and since money is now protected free speech or companies that are people...guess who has the most to throw around?

And then you have the fact that states themselves only place certain names on the ballots, regardless of who all are options to pick. There are QUITE a few factors involved in the limiting, and further belittling of the concept of "choice" in american politics.

I don't think anyone can really deny this.
Click to expand...
Local elections are less driven by money, IMHO. We know who the people are that are running and we know where they live.
 
conservativeguy said:
He's a union thug that gets paid whether he is working or not.
Click to expand...

Look at that "thug"! That damn free loader! Just thugging around doing thug union stuff like working! What a thug!
 
Ikari said:
Elections are not explicit restriction on government force.
Click to expand...

No, the constitution is, and not by nutty interpretations either. So if you are to say that this breaking of the law is Constitutional through the 1st amendment, then you should also agree that law enforcement has the Constitutional duty to enforce the laws of the land there right?

j-mac
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Look at that "thug"! That damn free loader! Just thugging around doing thug union stuff like working! What a thug!
Click to expand...

From an interview in Romania back in the late 70s....

Reporter: If the government tells you what to do, and what inadequate pay you will receive, then why do it?

Communist worker: They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work...


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
From an interview in Romania back in the late 70s....

Reporter: If the government tells you what to do, and what inadequate pay you will receive, then why do it?

Communist worker: They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work...


j-mac
Click to expand...

Uhhh soo tell me j-mac how from your last post in response to me; how the hell is this even closely relevant at all?
 
conservativeguy said:
Local elections are less driven by money, IMHO. We know who the people are that are running and we know where they live.
Click to expand...

True enough. But unfortunately, it seems that local governments' power dwindles every year. Ever administration comes out with some new legislation, some new reason, for why federal power must grow, at the cost of state and local.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Uhhh soo tell me j-mac how from your last post in response to me; how the hell is this even closely relevant at all?
Click to expand...

I swear, do you leftists even remember what you post? You were blathering on about how the guy in the photo of the trucker looked like he was working, and not upset about the protesters....So just as the Romanian, Unions pretend to work.....

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I swear, do you leftists even remember what you post? You were blathering on about how the guy in the photo of the trucker looked like he was working, and not upset about the protesters....So just as the Romanian, Unions pretend to work.....

j-mac
Click to expand...

Soo Romanian State employees=American Union member?

So you know this guy is pretending to work by himself driving his semi into the port to either get a shipment or drop off a shipment. I mean thats some good "pretending"
 
danarhea said:
When peoples' votes no longer matter, then rioting becomes the last resort of the people.
Click to expand...

Then they should stop voting for idiots and acting like children.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Soo Romanian State employees=American Union member?

So you know this guy is pretending to work by himself driving his semi into the port to either get a shipment or drop off a shipment. I mean thats some good "pretending"
Click to expand...


Straw man argument....

j-mac
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Uhhh soo tell me j-mac how from your last post in response to me; how the hell is this even closely relevant at all?
Click to expand...

i think he was pointing out that the guy, in fact, wasn't working.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom