• 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!

Breaking: Obama Warns Cantor 'Don't Call My Bluff' As Debt Talks Stall

What you are failing to recognize Zyph...is that it cannot be accomplished by spending cuts alone....Republicans know that....they are just playing politics to try to appease their radical right-wing. Its a complete lie....unless the GOP is willing to make huge cuts to military spending, which you and I both know is not going to happen.

Their refusal to compromise and negotiate is akin to an 8 year old agreeing to come to the dinner table but refusing to eat. They are throwing a tantrum and ultimately are going to pay politically for it, which is why I hope that they continue in their childish manner of refusing to address the issues.
 
What you are failing to recognize Zyph...is that it cannot be accomplished by spending cuts alone....Republicans know that....they are just playing politics to try to appease their radical right-wing.

Incorrect. It CAN be done by spending cuts alone. Can it be done easily? No. Can it be done painlessly? No. However it CAN be done.

Of course, we could always kick the ball down the court, avoid pain, and just continue to keep running up a huge debt but make it just a little smaller. You know, because kicking the can down the road only matters to you when its political advantageous disney.

Its a complete lie....unless the GOP is willing to make huge cuts to military spending, which you and I both know is not going to happen.

If the debt ceiling doesn't get increased its Obama's job to my understanding to dictate where to pay things out to or not. If the GOP doesn't want cuts to the military then that's tough tits to them. If they don't raise the limit and Obama wants to cut most of the money from the military budget then more power to him.

Their refusal to compromise and negotiate is akin to an 8 year old agreeing to come to the dinner table but refusing to eat.

The refusal to understand that repeating something again and again and again doesn't make it truth also is much akin to the logic an 8 year old would be apt to use.

They are compromising. Because you dislike the compromise doesn't make it not the case. They are negotitating, just because you don't like how doesn't make it not so. They are not refusing to compromise by saying "Absolutely no tax increases" anymore less than Obama is by saying "Absolutely must have tax increases".

They are throwing a tantrum and ultimately are going to pay politically for it,

They both are. Welcome to contentious negotiations.

which is why I hope that they continue in their childish manner of refusing to address the issues.

Kind of like saying "Look, you're either going to do it my way with the compromises I want to make or I'm walking out" and then walking out?

That kidn of childish?
 
Incorrect. It CAN be done by spending cuts alone. Can it be done easily? No. Can it be done painlessly? No. However it CAN be done.

Of course, we could always kick the ball down the court, avoid pain, and just continue to keep running up a huge debt but make it just a little smaller. You know, because kicking the can down the road only matters to you when its political advantageous disney.



If the debt ceiling doesn't get increased its Obama's job to my understanding to dictate where to pay things out to or not. If the GOP doesn't want cuts to the military then that's tough tits to them. If they don't raise the limit and Obama wants to cut most of the money from the military budget then more power to him.



The refusal to understand that repeating something again and again and again doesn't make it truth also is much akin to the logic an 8 year old would be apt to use.

They are compromising. Because you dislike the compromise doesn't make it not the case. They are negotitating, just because you don't like how doesn't make it not so. They are not refusing to compromise by saying "Absolutely no tax increases" anymore less than Obama is by saying "Absolutely must have tax increases".



They both are. Welcome to contentious negotiations.



Kind of like saying "Look, you're either going to do it my way with the compromises I want to make or I'm walking out" and then walking out?

That kidn of childish?

Again Zyph...simply put, you are wrong. Even most Republicans recognize that it cannot be accomplished by cuts alone. They have put themselves between a rock and a hard place and now are trying to figure out how they can save face and minimize the damage to themselves politically.

The GOP's answer is to make cuts to the poorest and the most disabled amongst us. Sorry, but balancing the budget on the backs of those that can least afford to pay is akin to holding us hostage in order to ensure that the pockets of the wealthy remain lined.

The Democrats will continue to stand with the middle class and those that can least afford to pay, while the GOP stands with the wealthy.

And if that's the way it is, which I hope it will be, then the GOP will pay a huge price.
 
What do you think will happen if we do not show the world a different slope in deficit spending? Do you think it is wise to wait until the world does to us what they are doing to several nations in Europe? Do you think it is reasonable that U.S.' s bond holders will stay asleep to the fed buying the new debt that the administration is creating to pay for a deficit about 10% of GDP? Do you understand what it means when we have a slow growth economy in the face of huge monetary and fiscal stimulus?

How about an adult debate on the issues. To talk about the debt ceiling in the abstract is babyish.

How are the concrete examples of what occurred in 1979 and the market reactions to Greece "abstract"? These things happened. It's history.

The babyish thing is to rally around millionaires to protect them when they need no protection. Our tax burden to GDP ratio is the third lowest in the OEDC; tax rates are historically low, with multitudinous loopholes for those who can afford to find them all - and people like the Koch Brothers and Grover Norquist pretend that we are living in the Soviet Union circa 1955 when it's inherently untrue.

The president's $4 trillion dollar plan - flawed though it is - is being rejected outright because Republicans refuse to negotiate.

Republicans control one-half of one-third of the government, but they pretend they hold all the cards. And they're willing to tank the economy for their political purposes.
 
Ahh more class warfare hyperbole. /facepalm

Oh puh-lease, ReverendHellh0und.....when the wealthy are given huge tax breaks, you don't call that "Class warfare", but when someone tries to end a tax cut or asks those who can most afford, to pay more....it all of a sudden becomes "class warfare"....

"Class warfare' is simply a talking point created by the GOP and its wingers because they are being exposed for being the "Classists" that they themselves are. They are being exposed for being willing to finance the budget on the backs of the poor and the middle class and they are uncomfortable with how they are being viewed.....so do what most do when you have nowhere to go.....blame the people who exposed you for who you are.
 
Oh puh-lease, ReverendHellh0und.....when the wealthy are given huge tax breaks, you don't call that "Class warfare", but when someone tries to end a tax cut or asks those who can most afford, to pay more....it all of a sudden becomes "class warfare"....

"Class warfare' is simply a talking point created by the GOP and its wingers because they are being exposed for being the "Classists" that they themselves are. They are being exposed for being willing to finance the budget on the backs of the poor and the middle class and they are uncomfortable with how they are being viewed.....so do what most do when you have nowhere to go.....blame the people who exposed you for who you are.



I'm sorry I can't hear you over all my obscene quantities of "caviar and truffles"..... ***Kisses mini girafe*** :pimpdaddy:
 
Oh puh-lease, ReverendHellh0und.....when the wealthy are given huge tax breaks, you don't call that "Class warfare",

Erronious, Reverend and others would likely say it was "class warfare" when tax breaks are only given to the wealthy. However, they have no said it in the past...such as with the bush tax cuts...because they were given to everyone, not just the wealthy.

It is Democrats, not Republicans, that are only targetting a one or two tax brackets and saying "DO SOMETHING TO THEM"...not republicans.

but when someone tries to end a tax cut or asks those who can most afford, to pay more....it all of a sudden becomes "class warfare"....

If the Democrats were saying we needed to end the Bush Tax cuts completely the class warefare comment would be irrelevant and useless. If the Democrats were suggesting to raise taxes on everyone the class warfare argument would be dead in the water.

Its because the Democrats ONLY want to tax a single class of people and not touch anyone else that the class warfare argument comes out. And rightly so, when the Democrats go out and suggest that anyone making enough to be what they deem as "rich" is being "greedy" if they don't agree with Democrats on tax increases while they fire up anyone else to "stick it to" the "greedy rich people" so that the government can afford to give them more free stuff like healthcare, unemployment money, and welfare by using someone elses money. Because, you know, wanting more stuff that you're not actually doing anything to earn by taking from someone else to fund it isn't greedy....but wanting to keep what you earned is apparently.

If the Democrats don't want the class warfare card to be thrown out how about they stop engaging their focus on a sigular class while spreading lies that the Republicans only ever do anything for the "upper class" which is 100% FACTUALLY wrong.
 
Hello? Hello? Question from post 181?

:lol: you're really one to talk about addressing questions and posts from others

Need I remind you of your episode of blatant hypocrisy? The point is, forget about it.
 
Last edited:
Erronious, Reverend and others would likely say it was "class warfare" when tax breaks are only given to the wealthy. However, they have no said it in the past...such as with the bush tax cuts...because they were given to everyone, not just the wealthy.

It is Democrats, not Republicans, that are only targetting a one or two tax brackets and saying "DO SOMETHING TO THEM"...not republicans.



If the Democrats were saying we needed to end the Bush Tax cuts completely the class warefare comment would be irrelevant and useless. If the Democrats were suggesting to raise taxes on everyone the class warfare argument would be dead in the water.

Its because the Democrats ONLY want to tax a single class of people and not touch anyone else that the class warfare argument comes out. And rightly so, when the Democrats go out and suggest that anyone making enough to be what they deem as "rich" is being "greedy" if they don't agree with Democrats on tax increases while they fire up anyone else to "stick it to" the "greedy rich people" so that the government can afford to give them more free stuff like healthcare, unemployment money, and welfare by using someone elses money. Because, you know, wanting more stuff that you're not actually doing anything to earn by taking from someone else to fund it isn't greedy....but wanting to keep what you earned is apparently.

If the Democrats don't want the class warfare card to be thrown out how about they stop engaging their focus on a sigular class while spreading lies that the Republicans only ever do anything for the "upper class" which is 100% FACTUALLY wrong.

They do MORE for the upper class. ;)
 
:lol: you're really one to talk about addressing questions and posts from others

Need I remind you of your episode of blatant hypocrisy? The point is, forget about it.

There are many places I've posted here. If I missed something please provide me a link and I'll be happy to address it.
 
Erronious, Reverend and others would likely say it was "class warfare" when tax breaks are only given to the wealthy. However, they have no said it in the past...such as with the bush tax cuts...because they were given to everyone, not just the wealthy.

Maybe the Reverend and others have no idea what class "warfare" actually means and like most ignorant Republicans he uses it whenever it suits him? Here, before you go on one of your boring ass diatribes:

- Republicans commit class "warfare" by funding farmers subsidies. Something they would not do for small business owners in Harlem.
- They also commit this by advocating on behalf of oil industries(drill baby drill?). Something they wouldn't do for scientific institutions.
- They also commit it by accusing Democrats of being supportive of criminals, minorities on welfare etc.

-------------------

In short, you have no idea what class "warfare" is. To you, the Reverend and others who pretend to know what it is, it's a cute soundbite. Nothing else. Class "warfare" is a game played by everybody in politics. Only Republicans seem to like accusing others of playing it while hypocritically playing along with it too.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the Reverend and others have no idea what class "warfare" actually means and like most ignorant Republicans he uses it whenever it suits him? Here, before you go on one of your boring ass diatribes:

- Republicans commit class "warfare" by funding farmers subsidies. Something they would not do for small business owners in Harlem.

Factually, this is incorrect.


- They also commit this by advocating on behalf of oil industries(drill baby drill?). Something they wouldn't do for scientific institutions.

The Good Reverend guesse you think poor people don't drive cars.


- They also commit it by accusing Democrats of being supportive of criminals, minorities on welfare etc.


The Good Reverend does not understand where this hyperbole is taking us.






-------------------

In short, you have no idea what class "warfare" is. To you, the Reverend and others who pretend to know what it is, it's a cute soundbite. Nothing else. Class "warfare" is a game played by everybody in politics. Only Republicans seem to like accusing others of playing it while hypocritically playing along with it too.


u mad bro? :ssst:





I don't support coporate welfare, I don't support farm subsidies,
 
Maybe the Reverend and others have no idea what class "warfare" actually means and like most ignorant Republicans he uses it whenever it suits him? Here, before you go on one of your boring ass diatribes:

- Republicans commit class "warfare" by funding farmers subsidies. Something they would not do for small business owners in Harlem.

Both recieve subsidies and neither side has taken any sort of actions to end either.

- They also commit this by advocating on behalf of oil industries(drill baby drill?). Something they wouldn't do for scientific institutions.

I don't believe it was a Republican argueing to end the space program.

- They also commit it by accusing Democrats of being supportive of criminals, minorities on welfare etc.

Are you saying they aren't supportive of these groups?

-------------------

In short, you have no idea what class "warfare" is. To you, the Reverend and others who pretend to know what it is, it's a cute soundbite. Nothing else. Class "warfare" is a game played by everybody in politics. Only Republicans seem to like accusing others of playing it while hypocritically playing along with it too.[/QUOTE]
 
Maybe the Reverend and others have no idea what class "warfare" actually means and like most ignorant Republicans he uses it whenever it suits him? Here, before you go on one of your boring ass diatribes:

Don't like my "boring ass diatribes" then don't read them. Pretty simple solution.

- Republicans commit class "warfare" by funding farmers subsidies. Something they would not do for small business owners in Harlem.

What class is that they're committing warfare against? Is "Small buisness owner in harlem" a class of people? When loosening regulations on requirements for small businesses such as federal requirements regarding various types of leave or entitlement payouts, such as the amount of employees a business requires before being fined for not providing health insurance, have they been putting in an exemption that "if one lives in Harlem they are exempt from this action" that I have completed missed? When they've pushed for the lowering of taxes relating to small businesses is there an * in their proposals that I've just glossed over that says "Harlem business owners do not apply".

or is this just more typical hautey "OMG THAT'S RACIST!" boring ass diatribes?

- They also commit this by advocating on behalf of oil industries(drill baby drill?). Something they wouldn't do for scientific institutions.

Yes, they advocate on behalf of the oil industry for reducing government regulation. They've also advocated on behalf of the coal and gas industry for reducing government regulation. They've advocated on behalf of the nuclear industry for reducing government regulation. They generally advocate for the reduction of government regulation on energy.

Exactly what class is that they're warring against?

- They also commit it by accusing Democrats of being supportive of criminals, minorities on welfare etc.

I will give you that, the Republicans do commit class warfare against the felon class. They do generally attempt to make criminals look like bad people for the fact that they're felons, you're correct.

The closest thing to class warfare in the context that's being talked about, IE the lower, middle, and upper class, would be in regards to thier efforts against welfare and those who obtain money off it. When they go for the argument less about the financial implications or the constitutional relevency of it but rather than "welfare" recipients are just lazy do nothings that mooch off the government, they are absolutely playing class warfare. And that's wrong of them when they approach it that way.

How exactly does that excuse the Democrats doing it though? "Mommy Mommy! He did it too!" Yeah, wonderful, they can both be jackasses...however, one sides jackassery is actually significantly relevant to the current conversation. There are far more right now calling for taxes on the "greedy rich people" who have "More than they need" then there are those saying "stop paying welfare to the lazy do nothings".

Only Republicans seem to like accusing others of playing it while hypocritically playing along with it too.

Sorry to bust up your boring ass diatribe hautey, but Republicans aren't the only ones who accuse the other side of doing it. Democrats do it just as much and are doing it in this thread, they just may not use the word. Everytime they accuse the Republicans of just looking out for the wealthy, only looking out for the wealthy, only caring about the wealthy, not caring about the poor, not worrying about the poor, etc they are stating that the Republicans are engaging in class warfare by attacking or defending only one side. Just because people like Disney aren't directly saying the words doesn't make their accusations of Republicans playing class warfare by going off "the backs of the elderly and the poor" any less present.
 
Both recieve subsidies and neither side has taken any sort of actions to end either.

Yes, Republicans advocate for subsidies to farmers. Democrats give subsidies to small business owners in the inner cities.

I don't believe it was a Republican argueing to end the space program.

House Republicans cut funding to UN climate science body | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Shortchanged: House GOP proposes mere 18% cut in EPA budget | JunkScience.com
U.S. Science Agencies Targeted for Budget Cuts: Scientific American

Are you saying they aren't supportive of these groups?

If minorities were the only people on welfare, but the percentage of people who are on welfare is pretty much spread between millions of whites, millions of blacks, hispanics etc. However Republicans only seem to focus on the minorities who are on welfare.
 
yes, it allows the Good Reverend to purchase copious amounts of Caviar and Truffles...... I am Epic win.

"Fish eggs and moose liver, bah! Where's the fish, where's the moose?"

"That's what rich people eat, the garbage parts of the animal"
 
Yes, Republicans advocate for subsidies to farmers. Democrats give subsidies to small business owners in the inner cities.

NASHVILLE, Ind. (AP) - U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar is supporting a push to repeal federal sugar subsidies, saying they were "concocted by law to favor a very few."

The Republican lawmaker made the comments Saturday during a stop at the Candy Dish, a Nashville confectionary that's a popular stop in the southern Indiana tourist town.


The ilast time this was tried, it was the Dems that saved it.

Sen. Lugar pushes sugar subsidy repeal



Do many of them want to defund the corrupt and wasteful UN? You bet and they should.

If minorities were the only people on welfare, but the percentage of people who are on welfare is pretty much spread between millions of whites, millions of blacks, hispanics etc. However Republicans only seem to focus on the minorities who are on welfare.

About as foolish and wrong as the rest of your post.
 
Last edited:
Don't like my "boring ass diatribes" then don't read them. Pretty simple solution.

What class is that they're committing warfare against? Is "Small buisness owner in harlem" a class of people? When loosening regulations on requirements for small businesses such as federal requirements regarding various types of leave or entitlement payouts, such as the amount of employees a business requires before being fined for not providing health insurance, have they been putting in an exemption that "if one lives in Harlem they are exempt from this action" that I have completed missed? When they've pushed for the lowering of taxes relating to small businesses is there an * in their proposals that I've just glossed over that says "Harlem business owners do not apply".

Here you demonstrate why you have no idea what "class warfare" is to begin with. You think of class in terms of income when it has never been that way. Is making 50K a year lower class while 250K is upper class? You can't define class in numbers. Do you define class as the proletariat and the bourgeoisie as Marxists do? Do you define it by making above or bellow a certain income? Do you determine it by the person's contribution to their society? Which sector they work in? You have no idea what class is to begin with so why try and act like you know what class warfare is?

or is this just more typical hautey "OMG THAT'S RACIST!" boring ass diatribes?

I don't write diatribes. I try to keep my readers in shock and awe. You seem to take the part of write as much as you can so your ignorance on the subject won't be obvious.

Yes, they advocate on behalf of the oil industry for reducing government regulation. They've also advocated on behalf of the coal and gas industry for reducing government regulation. They've advocated on behalf of the nuclear industry for reducing government regulation. They generally advocate for the reduction of government regulation on energy.

Exactly what class is that they're warring against?

See why I can't take you serious? You still don't know what "class" the major industries in this country belong to. If you don't know what class they belong to how do you know Democrats are commiting class warfare?

I will give you that, the Republicans do commit class warfare against the felon class. They do generally attempt to make criminals look like bad people for the fact that they're felons, you're correct.

The closest thing to class warfare in the context that's being talked about, IE the lower, middle, and upper class, would be in regards to thier efforts against welfare and those who obtain money off it. When they go for the argument less about the financial implications or the constitutional relevency of it but rather than "welfare" recipients are just lazy do nothings that mooch off the government, they are absolutely playing class warfare. And that's wrong of them when they approach it that way.

How exactly does that excuse the Democrats doing it though? "Mommy Mommy! He did it too!" Yeah, wonderful, they can both be jackasses...however, one sides jackassery is actually significantly relevant to the current conversation. There are far more right now calling for taxes on the "greedy rich people" who have "More than they need" then there are those saying "stop paying welfare to the lazy do nothings".

Do you know what class is? Cause the fact that after typing all that boring ****, you're still acting like "upper" "middle" and "lower" class are classes and felons, oil industries, etc are just floating globs of social fabric is why nobody can take a republican serious in discussions about "class warfare". Here I'll give you an example of class warfare and you can tell me how many classes it affects: Republicans advocate for tougher drug laws. Drug laws which only affect low income neighborhoods as they lack working possibilities. How many classes does this affect? 1, 2, 3? All? Or is it just two? Which ones.

Sorry to bust up your boring ass diatribe hautey,

I didn't write one. Do you know what a diatribe is? I guess your concept of diatribe is as strong as your concept of "class warfare".

but Republicans aren't the only ones who accuse the other side of doing it.

Which Democrats in the US do it? Oh you mean the 3-4 people on this thread?

Democrats do it just as much and are doing it in this thread, they just may not use the word. Everytime they accuse the Republicans of just looking out for the wealthy, only looking out for the wealthy, only caring about the wealthy, not caring about the poor, not worrying about the poor, etc they are stating that the Republicans are engaging in class warfare by attacking or defending only one side. Just because people like Disney aren't directly saying the words doesn't make their accusations of Republicans playing class warfare by going off "the backs of the elderly and the poor" any less present.

Democrats acknowledge that it's necessary. Republicans pretend it's not. Then they hand corn subsidies to farmer Joe.
 
Last edited:
yes, they will judge the incumbents as those at fault.


Many of the republicans this go round were voted in on stopping the spending, these folks may see a light at the end of the tunnel through all this.

If they see the light they have steadfastly refused to go into it. Let us hope the light the 2010 GOP winners do see is the light at the unemployment office.
 
Maybe the Reverend and others have no idea what class "warfare" actually means and like most ignorant Republicans he uses it whenever it suits him? Here, before you go on one of your boring ass diatribes:

- Republicans commit class "warfare" by funding farmers subsidies. Something they would not do for small business owners in Harlem.

um. agricultural subsidies were put into place by Democrats and protected by both parties until Republicans voted to get rid of them in the 2012 House Budget.... that Democrats killed in the Senate.

- They also commit this by advocating on behalf of oil industries(drill baby drill?). Something they wouldn't do for scientific institutions.

oil companies, of course, provide above-average incomes for non-college educated blue collar workers everywhere they go. I have several friends of mine who have gone to work on drilling sites after the Marines, because it's a good career for those who honestly assess themselves to not be intellectuals. those bastards.

They also commit it by accusing Democrats of being supportive of criminals, minorities on welfare etc.

not "being supportive of" those individuals. being supportive of those behaviors


Republicans (generally) recognize that the interests of the "classes" (such as we have them) are aligned. Democrats (generally) believe the are opposed. that is the difference.
 
You're 0 for 3, that's not what you said either. You said:
"Yes but what good are cuts when Obama has them take affect in 10 years?" ~ ptif219
You're only changing what you said now that your confusion was put in the spotlight.

Nice try but this is about Obama. As usual you try to deflect to avoid what Obama is doing.

I would tell the GOP to ask Obama one question.

Mr. President how much more money do you need to to buy the votes you need to win the 2012 election?

What Obama is doing is not about the country it is about Obama annd the election
 
Back
Top Bottom