• 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!

Petition to recall Wisconsin GOP Sen. Sheila Harsdorf to be filed Tuesday

How do you get that from what I said? The whole intent of the Constitution is to promote the welfare of We the People, not step on the welfare of the people to promote the Corporation's influence in our government. The Constitution is WHY we fight against fascism.


No, you are absolutely, 100% wrong here. Well, maybe not 100%, but 97%.

Although there is a direct mention to promoting the "General Welfare" of the people, the Constitution of the United States is a document outlining the duties, and restrictions of the Government to do on behalf of, and restrict the Government from doing to the American people.

What you describe has more in common with the Communist manifesto then it does this countrys founding document. You are woefully backwards in what your definitions of political structure are. Product of Public Schools?

j-mac
 
No, you are absolutely, 100% wrong here. Well, maybe not 100%, but 97%.

Although there is a direct mention to promoting the "General Welfare" of the people, the Constitution of the United States is a document outlining the duties, and restrictions of the Government to do on behalf of, and restrict the Government from doing to the American people.

What you describe has more in common with the Communist manifesto then it does this countrys founding document. You are woefully backwards in what your definitions of political structure are. Product of Public Schools?

j-mac

It's both. Remember it is the result of a second attempt. The first effort had too weak a government and the founding fathers had to make sure government was strong enough to handle things that needed to be handled. A completely hands off federal government wa workable.

J, the communist scare tactic is really an old one. Can't we at least try to be more original?
 
How do you get that from what I said? The whole intent of the Constitution is to promote the welfare of We the People, not step on the welfare of the people to promote the Corporation's influence in our government. The Constitution is WHY we fight against fascism.

See this is what happens when you let other people tell you what to think, buy into the idiocy that is class warfare and don't use the mark-1 brain unit you were blessed with at birth.

The Constitution was set up to severely constrain the Government and what it could do to you, the individual. That's the REAL purpose behind it. Alas, so many like yourself have been intentionally lied too, convinced that the Government is supposed to HELP you that you have absolutely no clue as to the dangerous path you have embarked on.

Human History is replete with examples of what happens when Government, no matter it's name or form, has more power then the people. In fact, that's the case in the majority of all Countries. America has been different because we've operated on the premise that the Government < People.

You really want to know what separates, on a fundamental idealogical level, the left and the right? Those on the Left believe Government can be tamed, the Right knows that's playing with fire.
 
When you listen to an arguement that pursuades, that is not being told what to think. :coffeepap
 
When you listen to an arguement that pursuades, that is not being told what to think. :coffeepap

If you're persuaded by lies, envy, and emotionalism vs facts, reality and history... that says all we need know about you.
 
If you're persuaded by lies, envy, and emotionalism vs facts, reality and history... that says all we need know about you.

But who can really judge that? Seriously, it could just as easily be that the person claiming such a thing merely doesn't understand the argument, misreads the facts, fails to understand history.
 
It is your choice. America has never been socialist. If you want to overthrow our current system and trash the Constitution, I say that makes you anti-American, whether you live in Kansas or Cuba.

I do not want to "overthrow" the current system. I believe in democracy not violence. I believe in protests not war..
Never want to trash the constitution.. I think the constitution is one of the most brilliant documents ever written.. Don't know where you got that idea from...
 
But who can really judge that? Seriously, it could just as easily be that the person claiming such a thing merely doesn't understand the argument, misreads the facts, fails to understand history.

And we could go around and around about that one. How about this, let's look at the goal of the Constitution and it's Intent. To protect the people from the Government. Read my Sig:
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
-Thomas Jefferson.

Note that the left, the side you ideologically have aligned yourself with actively seeks to "take care of" the people, by confiscating greater amounts of wealth. Precisely what Mr. Jefferson was warning us about. The GOP has plenty of folks that also partake in this behavior, and I despise them for it too.

Jefferson and the Founding Fathers knew the dangers, ya'll ignore those dangers under the false belief that you can "do it right this time". It cannot be done, this "great Society" where everyone is equal in life, where the poor are taken care by a benevolent government.

We're 14 TRILLION in debt and counting, yet you don't care.


The more the Gov't "helps", the worse life gets for all.

Does this mean I support no Gov't? Of course not, don't be absurd.
 
And we could go around and around about that one. How about this, let's look at the goal of the Constitution and it's Intent. To protect the people from the Government. Read my Sig:
-Thomas Jefferson.

Note that the left, the side you ideologically have aligned yourself with actively seeks to "take care of" the people, by confiscating greater amounts of wealth. Precisely what Mr. Jefferson was warning us about. The GOP has plenty of folks that also partake in this behavior, and I despise them for it too.

Jefferson and the Founding Fathers knew the dangers, ya'll ignore those dangers under the false belief that you can "do it right this time". It cannot be done, this "great Society" where everyone is equal in life, where the poor are taken care by a benevolent government.

We're 14 TRILLION in debt and counting, yet you don't care.


The more the Gov't "helps", the worse life gets for all.

Does this mean I support no Gov't? Of course not, don't be absurd.

Your signature has nothing to do with any issue we're discussing. Most these things are not about the government taking care of anyone, but in doing what the founding fathers did from the begining, using government to make sure things work. As I pointed out earlier, this constitution was the second attempt. We needed a stronger federal government, so we went back to the drawing board.

And I certainly care about the debt. I wish republicans would care about it not only when democrats are in charge, but also when they are.

That said, I purpose that we cut spending and increase taxes. One of the reason for supporting a single payer system is because it is a cheaper way to tackle health care. Remember we spend more less right now.

And your premise about things getting worse for people is simply false. We're better today than we were in the past. During the great depression, for example, people suffered far greater than we do today despite the economic miseries. In fact, it is because of government regulations and efforts that pain has been reduced. It is far better to be poor today than it has been in the past. Overall, life is better and government has played a role in that improvement.

Too often anti-government types don't look at everything. Single out the problem areas, but ingore the improvements. Both sides can do this, but the fact is governemnt is an extension of us. We vote and they represent. It's how it works. Nothing in the constitution prevents us using government to solve problems that effect the nation.
 
No, you are absolutely, 100% wrong here. Well, maybe not 100%, but 97%.

Although there is a direct mention to promoting the "General Welfare" of the people, the Constitution of the United States is a document outlining the duties, and restrictions of the Government to do on behalf of, and restrict the Government from doing to the American people.

What you describe has more in common with the Communist manifesto then it does this countrys founding document. You are woefully backwards in what your definitions of political structure are. Product of Public Schools?

j-mac

Thanks for your opinion! :sun

"The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution's fundamental purposes and guiding principles. It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve."

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Preamble to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The liberals suffered through Bush's two terms as did the rest of America. It was his leadership, or lack thereof, that allowed the Democrats to regain power. Elections are how we change policy in this country. I am willing to wager that Walker will be a one-term Governor.

Hmmm …. then what does that say about the leadership of Democrats?? 2010 was history making in Republican gains …. guess that was the leadership of Obama huh ??

Will Walker be a one term Governor, I think that will depends on the “results” of his actions …. they aren't in yet, and what we hear most of is the screaming of the liberals about his actions. If those actions don't produce results … then yes he will be a one term Governor.

Will Obama be a one term president ? I personally think that the same applies to him, we haven't seen any results yet, but that could change .. but if it doesn't … he is a one term president as well ..

Now here is where I get into trouble with republicans, personally I don't care if he is elected or not .. the only time this country runs with any sense is when one party controls both houses … and the other party controls the white house. It's only then that we have to proper checks and balances in place that neither party can promote only their agenda .
 
I love the song :)

They think this crap will fly...all the while paying NO attention what the majority of Americans told them last November....and recently in the WI SC election.

We aren't going to play this crap anymore...

Did you watch his video?
 
Hmmm …. then what does that say about the leadership of Democrats?? 2010 was history making in Republican gains …. guess that was the leadership of Obama huh ??

I think it was more about the Recession that the Democrats did not fix quickly enough. We'll find out in a little over a year. Personally, I don't think anyone can beat him. Who's your pick?

Will Walker be a one term Governor, I think that will depends on the “results” of his actions …. they aren't in yet, and what we hear most of is the screaming of the liberals about his actions. If those actions don't produce results … then yes he will be a one term Governor.

Yup!

Will Obama be a one term president ? I personally think that the same applies to him, we haven't seen any results yet, but that could change .. but if it doesn't … he is a one term president as well ..

While there is much in Obama's foreign policy that I fault him for, but under Obama's leadership we changed our course the last administration had us on to another Great Depression, made the largest step towards national health care (like all the rest of the 1st world nations) that has ever been made, provided a tax cut for the middle class (those hardest hit by the recession) and has invested more than any president in history in alternatives to our war for oil energy policy of the last decade.

To me, that's one hell of an accomplishment with the dead weight of the GOP blocking every step forward this country tries to take.

Now here is where I get into trouble with republicans, personally I don't care if he is elected or not .. the only time this country runs with any sense is when one party controls both houses … and the other party controls the white house. It's only then that we have to proper checks and balances in place that neither party can promote only their agenda .

If it would result in meaningful compromise, yes. My observations through the years is that it has resulted in problems just being ignored in hopes they go away. We'll see if it will be any different this time.
 
Last edited:
Catawba;1059428231]I think it was more about the Recession that the Democrats did not fix quickly enough. We'll find out in a little over a year. Personally, I don't think anyone can beat him. Who's your pick?

Well everyone is entitled to their opinions, mine is the people weren't on board with the policies of the democrats, and the direction this country was headed in. As for my pick ... doesn't matter, if he doesn't show results in the next year and half ... anyone can beat him, Just as in 2008 there was not a Republican that could have won, didn't matter who the opposition was ... a democrat was going to win. The bottom line is really very simple, either things improve .... or you are out of office .. and if they do improve, a sitting president is nearly unbeatable.




Yep ?? But what if his actions end up producing results ? It could mean he would be unbeatable by the next election he faces .



While there is much in Obama's foreign policy that I fault him for, but under Obama's leadership we changed our course the last administration had us on to another Great Depression, made the largest step towards national health care (like all the rest of the 1st world nations) that has ever been made, provided a tax cut for the middle class (those hardest hit by the recession) and has invested more than any president in history in alternatives to our war for oil energy policy of the last decade.

To me, that's one hell of an accomplishment with the dead weight of the GOP blocking every step forward this country tries to take.

Chuckles …. well the claim can be made that he saved us from a depression, but that is something that can never be proven.

Well you keep promoting the great obama health care bill, it's still not widely liked, it may never become law, if obama's lawyers ever allow it to get to the Supreme Court, their delay tactics are very telling to me. As for all those other 1st world countries you speak of, why is it that the majority of them are doing whatever they can to get out from under the overbearing cost of health care to the government??? Seems to me that we are trying to implement what many other governments are trying to get out from under.

As for your asinine statement of the GOP blocking him at every turn, that is the common response of a liberal, that seems to forget that the liberals held all three branches of government with overwhelming majorities, and that the GOP couldn't stop anything. It was your liberal party that couldn't get things together …. so stop blaming their ineptness on others.



If it would result in meaningful compromise, yes. My observations through the years is that it has resulted in problems just being ignored in hopes they go away. We'll see if it will be any different this time

Again that is you opinion, from what I've seen the only progress that was made over the years have come from just that scenario..... one party control just doesn't work, never has … never will .
 
Last edited:
Again that is you opinion, from what I've seen the only progress that was made over the years have come from just that scenario..... one party control just doesn't work, never has … never will .

That's why I've fought against our march to fascism over the last 30 years.
 
4 down and 4 to go, although I believe that only 5 or possibly 6 out of the 8 will end up being recalled. Still, considering the difficulty of recall in Wisconsin, this is a very impressive number - Which goes to show you that, if you are elitist enough to believe that you can do anything you want after being elected, and act like thugs while doing it, you are going to be hammered for it.

Folks, THIS is what Democracy looks like.

Article is here.

Yes it is.
I hope the union busting scum end up on history's scrap heap.
 
Saw this today on youtube..made me think of WI here in the near future...
 
The more the Gov't "helps", the worse life gets for all.

Norway has a very strong public sector, and a lot of social services provided from the gov, and they have the happiest people in the world, and their economy missed the global recession...
 
Norway has a very strong public sector, and a lot of social services provided from the gov, and they have the happiest people in the world, and their economy missed the global recession...

I don't know much about Norway, but your statement seemed unlikely so I decided to take a look... and the first link I clicked on rther disproved your statement... additionally, the thing you seem to love the most is what will contribute to them being in the recession longer.

Norwegian economy still in recession

According to the latest prognosis from Statistics Norway (SSB), the Norwegian economy remains clearly in recession after four quarters of moderate growth in GDP for Mainland Norway.

Increased domestic demand is expected to stimulate growth, but there will not be an appreciable upswing for another two years, SSB states.

The latest GDP figures from the Quarterly National Accounts (QNA) showed slightly lower growth in GDP for Mainland Norway than the trend in the Norwegian economy. The SSB does not expect domestic consumer demand to pick up this autumn and business investment to increase. Weak growth in international demand and reduced growth impulses from fiscal policies will dampen the rise in activity.

Weak international growth combined with reduced Norwegian cost competitiveness will result in a relatively modest rise in exports in the next few years. Exports of traditional goods are not expected to return to their 2008 levels until 2012, SSB analysts believe.


Second link proved to be pretty much the same. Appears that only oil prevented them from faling into an even deeper recession.

Norway Slides Into Recession - NYTimes.com

Gross domestic product for Norway, excluding petroleum-related activity, contracted by 1 percent during the first quarter of 2009 from the previous quarter, when it declined 0.8 percent, Statistics Norway, the country’s data agency, said on Tuesday.
 
Last edited:
I don't know much about Norway, but your statement seemed unlikely so I decided to take a look... and the first link I clicked on rther disproved your statement... additionally, the thing you seem to love the most is what will contribute to them being in the recession longer.

Norwegian economy still in recession




Second link proved to be pretty much the same. Appears that only oil prevented them from faling into an even deeper recession.

Norway Slides Into Recession - NYTimes.com

According to this article Norway skipped the recession and thier economy somewhat grew during while others suffered.
" With a quirky contrariness as deeply etched in the national character as the fjords carved into its rugged landscape, Norway has thrived by going its own way. When others splurged, it saved. When others sought to limit the role of government, Norway strengthened its cradle-to-grave welfare state.

And in the midst of the worst global downturn since the Depression, Norway’s economy grew last year by just under 3 percent. The government enjoys a budget surplus of 11 percent and its ledger is entirely free of debt."

Norway Thrives by Going Against the Tide - NYTimes.com
 
Norway has a very strong public sector, and a lot of social services provided from the gov, and they have the happiest people in the world, and their economy missed the global recession...

And it's a smaller country with a low population and a different set of values, history and circumstances. Namely the massive oil industry pouring in resources to allowing such spending.
 
According to this article Norway skipped the recession and thier economy somewhat grew during while others suffered.
" With a quirky contrariness as deeply etched in the national character as the fjords carved into its rugged landscape, Norway has thrived by going its own way. When others splurged, it saved. When others sought to limit the role of government, Norway strengthened its cradle-to-grave welfare state.

And in the midst of the worst global downturn since the Depression, Norway’s economy grew last year by just under 3 percent. The government enjoys a budget surplus of 11 percent and its ledger is entirely free of debt."

Norway Thrives by Going Against the Tide - NYTimes.com

Yes, cause they sell **** tons of oil and gas.
 
According to this article Norway skipped the recession and thier economy somewhat grew during while others suffered.
" With a quirky contrariness as deeply etched in the national character as the fjords carved into its rugged landscape, Norway has thrived by going its own way. When others splurged, it saved. When others sought to limit the role of government, Norway strengthened its cradle-to-grave welfare state.

And in the midst of the worst global downturn since the Depression, Norway’s economy grew last year by just under 3 percent. The government enjoys a budget surplus of 11 percent and its ledger is entirely free of debt."

Norway Thrives by Going Against the Tide - NYTimes.com

You supply an earlier article printed in the NY Times on 05/13/09 indicating that Norway has avoided a recession. That article makes it clear that the only reason they didn't enter recession was it's oil/energy revenues.

However, another article comes out just 6 days later, 05/19/09, is printed in the same newspaper and indicates that Norway has slid into recession.

Do you think you may want to take the most recent information?

I completely get that people are biased, but all I can say is wow. You so want to stick to your own conclusion that you ignore a more recent NY Times article and Statistics Norway's own proclamation that they have entered recession and the recovery will take longer to exit due to their "reduced cost competitveness".
 
Last edited:
You supply an earlier article printed in the NY Times on 05/13/09 indicating that Norway has avoided a recession. That article makes it clear that the only reason they didn't enter recession was it's oil/energy revenues.

However, another article comes out just 6 days later, 05/19/09, is printed in the same newspaper and indicates that Norway has slid into recession.

Do you think you may want to take the most recent information?

I completely get that people are biased, but all I can say is wow. You so want to stick to your own conclusion that you ignore a more recent NY Times article and Statistics Norway's own proclamation that they have entered recession and the recovery will take longer to exit due to their "reduced cost competitveness".

Yea it seems that i was "misinformed".
But it seems Norway was in a recession for less than 3 months... Norway out of recession « Norway.com
 
Yea it seems that i was "misinformed".
But it seems Norway was in a recession for less than 3 months... Norway out of recession « Norway.com

I appreciate that you acknowledge that... But, im not sure that the 3 month recession claim is even true.

I'm looking at the GDP for the country, and it was negative in 1st, 2nd, and 4th quarter of 2009 and 3rd quarter of 2010. The quarters not mentioned were either 0 of just above zero at .6% increase. I think that could very fairly be defined as 7 quarters of recession. i am not certain how Statistics Norway defined it.

It obviously wasn't a deep recession, but I think that's primarly due to their oil and energy industry.

You can see their quarterly GDP in the middle of this page:

Quarterly national accounts
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom