• 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!

Does Obama want a government shut down?

Does Obama want a government shut down?


  • Total voters
    35
I see...You don't mind dishonesty, manipulation and deception as long as it's "your" guy doing it to you.

1. You're missing my point entirely, but congratulations.

Right-wingers constantly scream "ALINSKY TACTICS" regarding liberals, when using those same tactics themselves. It's weapons-grade hypocrisy, puked onto the internet without the slightest hint of irony.

2. Obama's not "my" guy. I know it's common thought on the right that anyone who isn't screaming "IMPEACH" is a mindless automaton, but bear with me. I think he's a middling president at best. But some of the stuff he gets attacked with from the right is just laughably stupid.
 
Every Navy Pride thread is like an infestation of retarded posts. You can almost guess how it'll go.

Liberals: Republicans bad!
Conservatives: Democrats bad!
"Independent" (Conservative posters): Saul Alinski bad!
"Independent" (Liberal posters): Bush is bad my niggas!
White poster pretending to be black: Don't mention Obama! Libbos will call you racist!
Navy Pride: ...

Mods need to stop ****ing off already and ban that troll for 7 years of worthless posts, suggesting he raped women, blatantly racist nonsense and an overall level of retardation that brings the general quality of posters down.
 
Last edited:
Liberals are the only ones I ever see talking about Cruz. I really have no idea what he even looks like or who he represents or why leftists are so obsessed with him. I guess they need a new paper tiger to slay to avoid the realities that their guy is a quacky lame duck

That's a joke post, right? Cruz is now the new Sarah Palin - the darling of the Teapublicans and right wing loons everywhere. You don't have to believe what I say about him. Just check out what conservative house republicans are saying about him. The Right Wing Zealots in the Republican Party are just a gift that keeps on giving!
 
1. You're missing my point entirely, but congratulations.

Well, explain it to me.

Right-wingers constantly scream "ALINSKY TACTICS" regarding liberals, when using those same tactics themselves. It's weapons-grade hypocrisy, puked onto the internet without the slightest hint of irony.

No one is "constantly screaming"..you exaggerate wildly. You hate to hear about Alinsky tactics from the "right" but you don't mind them if the "left" uses them.
You don't deny that the "left" and specifically your "community organizer" president overtly uses those tactics, do you?


2. Obama's not "my" guy. I know it's common thought on the right that anyone who isn't screaming "IMPEACH" is a mindless automaton, but bear with me. I think he's a middling president at best. But some of the stuff he gets attacked with from the right is just laughably stupid.

obama purposely and overtly uses the Cloward - Pivens technique to bring about the "Change" he promised a few years ago. Only the true believers don't (want to) see through it.

"The strategy entails manufacturing a crisis and then implementing a solution that actually makes the crisis much worse and moreover, makes implementation of a real solution to the crisis next to impossible; and every solution to the crisis must invariably entail purposefully overwhelming federal government programs in an effort to cause those programs and the federal government to implode under its own weight."

Remember what Rahm said. "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."


http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the Cloward-Piven Strategy seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue an African American man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called "crisis strategy" or "Cloward-Piven Strategy," as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when "the rest of society is afraid of them," Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven's early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. "Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1971 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.




Part of your problem is that you view people as an extension of a political party and you think one side is "better" than the other. Your vilification of the right shows which way your bias leans. You've been well indoctrinated, comrade.

Right-wingers constantly scream...

weapons-grade hypocrisy...

puked onto the internet...

I know it's common thought on the right that anyone who isn't screaming "IMPEACH" is a mindless automaton...

attacked with from the right...

laughably stupid...

yeah....no bias there, huh? :roll:

EDIT;
Seriously..look up any link you want with reference to cloward - pivens and then consider the things obama is doing/has done and tell me dear leader obama isn't using it as his playbook.
 




Right now what Obama wants probably will not be the deciding factor.

It's what the losers on the GOP's far right want that will determine what happens.

I hope that they force a government shutdown.

They will not like the results.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
 
No one is "constantly screaming"..you exaggerate wildly. You hate to hear about Alinsky tactics from the "right" but you don't mind them if the "left" uses them.
You don't deny that the "left" and specifically your "community organizer" president overtly uses those tactics, do you?

I couldn't care less if anyone uses them. I don't "hate to hear" about them, I simply recognize the hypocrisy in the right whining about them on one hand while using them in spades on the other

BTW, he's your president too.

obama purposely and overtly uses the Cloward - Pivens technique to bring about the "Change" he promised a few years ago. Only the true believers don't (want to) see through it.

I'm well aware of what the C-P strategy is. I also think it's a load of hooey that anyone is purposely trying to crash the system by making more poor people.


Part of your problem is that you view people as an extension of a political party and you think one side is "better" than the other.

That's part of MY problem? Ah yes, all those wonderful things I've said about the Democrats, such as ... uh ...

I do think one side is "better" than the other, in the sense that I feel ointment is better than suppository. Either way, you still have hemorrhoids.

Your vilification of the right shows which way your bias leans.

I never claimed to be unbiased. I think the Democrats are rotten; I think the Republicans are worse.

You've been well indoctrinated, comrade.

Adorable. Anyone who doesn't toe the conservative line is simply "indoctrinated." If I had a nickel for every time a conservative-leaning poster tried to throw that one at me on the internet, I would have lots of nickels.

yeah....no bias there, huh? :roll:

Again, I never claimed to be unbiased. And neither can you, in any serious way.
 
I couldn't care less if anyone uses them. I don't "hate to hear" about them, I simply recognize the hypocrisy in the right whining about them on one hand while using them in spades on the other
Do you deny that the "left" is using alinsky tactics?
Your bias is showing again, by the way. "whining"

BTW, he's your president too.
He's not on my side and I'm not on his.




I'm well aware of what the C-P strategy is. I also think it's a load of hooey that anyone is purposely trying to crash the system by making more poor people.

Then you don't really understand C-P at all.
It isn't about "making people poor". It has nothing to do with "making people poor". It's about purposely overwhelming the system and collapsing it under its' own weight.




That's part of MY problem? Ah yes, all those wonderful things I've said about the Democrats, such as ... uh ...

It isn't how much you praise the democrats..it's the constant vilification of the other side that exposes you.

I do think one side is "better" than the other, in the sense that I feel ointment is better than suppository. Either way, you still have hemorrhoids.
Sure..sure.....whatever...I've yet to see a criticism of the "left", though..however you DO spend a lot of time criticizing and disparaging the "right", I notice.




I never claimed to be unbiased. I think the Democrats are rotten; I think the Republicans are worse.

Oh?..Ok..Name 3 things obama has done that you disagree with and find "rotten".



Adorable. Anyone who doesn't toe the conservative line is simply "indoctrinated."
No one said anything of the sort. You're trying to be evasive...but again your bias leaks through as you can only bring yourself to criticize "conservatives".

One who refuses to find fault with the party they support is "indoctrinated."





Again, I never claimed to be unbiased. And neither can you, in any serious way.
You're making things up again. I certainly can claim to be unbiased and my post history will show that I despise both parties and all politicians equally.
You'll never see me say something juvenile like "teabagger"..or "left wing nut"... I've been around since LBJ and I've heard every lie and seen every deception the govt has perpetrated since then.

Usually it's the young, idealistic and naive who also happen to have very little real life experience that are the most hyper partisans and who indulge in all that name calling and willingly swallow all the divisive govt propaganda. rah! go team! LMAO
 
It isn't how much you praise the democrats..it's the constant vilification of the other side that exposes you.

Exposes me as what?

Oh?..Ok..Name 3 things obama has done that you disagree with and find "rotten".

1. He didn't concentrate enough on the economy in his first few years. While things were still in the crapper, he was off fighting the culture war.
2. I utterly detest the seemingly indiscriminate drone strikes, escalation of the war in Afghanistan, the NSA's snooping around all our stuff, and the idea that we can zap American citizens without due process. While a lot of this was shepherded through by Congress, I find Obama's relative silence on these issues to be deafening. "Just trust me" doesn't fly.
3. While I certainly don't buy the far-right line that he was trying to incite a race war, I rather would have liked to see Obama measure his words better (or perhaps just shut up outside of a short statement) regarding such a hot-button case as Zimmerman/Martin.

Way to shift the argument from "Democrats" to "Obama," though.

No one said anything of the sort. You're trying to be evasive...but again your bias leaks through as you can only bring yourself to criticize "conservatives".

One who refuses to find fault with the party they support is "indoctrinated."

What party do I support? Am I a registered Democrat? Did I vote for Obama in 2012?

You're making things up again. I certainly can claim to be unbiased and my post history will show that I despise both parties and all politicians equally.
You'll never see me say something juvenile like "teabagger"..or "left wing nut"... I've been around since LBJ and I've heard every lie and seen every deception the govt has perpetrated since then.

I'm thrilled for you.

Usually it's the young, idealistic and naive who also happen to have very little real life experience that are the most hyper partisans and who indulge in all that name calling and willingly swallow all the divisive govt propaganda. rah! go team! LMAO

All I see here is a lot of supposition, based on a few days' worth of forum posts, in your desperate attempt to paint me as a Democratic Party bootlicker. Oh, and also someone who's "young, idealistic and naive" with "very little real life experience" who "swallows government propaganda." All while knowing precisely nothing about me. Kudos.

Am I biased against conservatives? YES. I think the American right wing is one of the most toxic ideological movements in my lifetime. Certainly doesn't mean I think everything the left, such as it is in this country, does is peaches and cream. But I see very little from the right that isn't deserving of scorn. So if that makes me "biased," I'll happily wear that label. I'll take that over constant appeals to the center and pulling stuff out of my ass to burnish some mythical above-the-fray moderate credentials. In the meantime, jump off your little judgmental horse and stop simply assuming things about people when you have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Your thoughts please.

I do not think anyone in office wants a government shut down. Obama and the democrats in office just do not want to get rid of Obamacare and most of the republicans in office allegedly(I say allegedly because many republicans supported individual mandates way before Obama wanted them) do want to get rid of Obamacare. Each side is supposedly catering to their constituents. I say supposedly because I suspect that once the republicans have the white house and a majority in both houses or republicans get enough in the senate to override Obama's veto they will pretty much cease any attempts to repeal Obamacare, just like they did the Brady bill.
 
"You types"? Cute.

I suppose you won't mind then, if we decide to dismiss your sources offhandedly, without at least considering what they actually have to say.

Like that one, do ya?

Mind? Judging by some of the posts I've been reading I thought it was a given...;)
 
Exposes me as what?
Biased





Way to shift the argument from "Democrats" to "Obama," though.
Is obama a democrat?



What party do I support? Am I a registered Democrat? Did I vote for Obama in 2012?
Don't know, don't care. Read the post again. None of that was mentioned.



I'm thrilled for you.
Experience tends to trump ideology.



All I see here is a lot of supposition, based on a few days' worth of forum posts, in your desperate attempt to paint me as a Democratic Party bootlicker. Oh, and also someone who's "young, idealistic and naive" with "very little real life experience" who "swallows government propaganda." All while knowing precisely nothing about me. Kudos.

I'm not "desperately attempting" to do anything. You exaggerate...again.
No one called you "young, idealistic and naive" or "very little real life experience" "swallows government propaganda.". If you read the post, you'll see those are my definitions of hyperpartisans. You may be all of those things...but your knee jerk reaction to become defensive throughout this conversation is noted. Maybe I hit a nerve.


Am I biased against conservatives? YES. I think the American right wing is one of the most toxic ideological movements in my lifetime. Certainly doesn't mean I think everything the left, such as it is in this country, does is peaches and cream. But I see very little from the right that isn't deserving of scorn. So if that makes me "biased," I'll happily wear that label. I'll take that over constant appeals to the center and pulling stuff out of my ass to burnish some mythical above-the-fray moderate credentials.

I already knew you were biased anyway. No big deal.


In the meantime, jump off your little judgmental horse and stop simply assuming things about people when you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm not judging anything. You are exaggerating...again...your tendency to leap to conclusions and become defensive is noted...again.
 
Are you quite done?

If "biased" is all you've got, well, I guess we're done here. Oh, and being older doesn't necessarily make you right.
 
Are you quite done?

Yes..I believe I've made my point.

If "biased" is all you've got, well, I guess we're done here.
I don't "have" anything. I already knew you were biased. You show it in every post. No secret...I did learn that you get very defensive when you get called on it.

Oh, and being older doesn't necessarily make you right.
I never said it did. What I said was experience tends to trump ideology...and that's true.
 
I don't "have" anything. I already knew you were biased. You show it in every post. No secret...I did learn that you get very defensive when you get called on it.

Yes, I got so defensive that I ... acknowledged that yes, I'm "biased." Of course, "bias" here, while you may attempt to use that to marginalize my positions, is nothing new. Everyone is "biased" to some extent. Even you.
 
Yes, I got so defensive that I ... acknowledged that yes, I'm "biased." Of course, "bias" here, while you may attempt to use that to marginalize my positions, is nothing new.

You got defensive and claimed things that I never said. Don't try to move the goal posts now. Anyone bored enough to have actually read our conversation can see the facts.

Everyone is "biased" to some extent. Even you.
Well, we've sure come a long way from you pretending to be outraged because the "right" recognizes the alinsky tactics and cloward pivens strategy that obama employs...now we're talking about me being biased...
Once again I'll tell you I'm not biased toward or against either side. A lie is a lie...corruption is corruption. I won't cover for either side...like some people do...I've been around long enough to have seen how government works and know the truth about politicians.
 
You got defensive and claimed things that I never said. Don't try to move the goal posts now. Anyone bored enough to have actually read our conversation can see the facts.

No I did not ... you're the one who backtracked and claimed you weren't really talking about me.

PARAPHRASE: "Young, naive hyperpartisans ... oh, wait, I didn't mean you!"

Well, we've sure come a long way from you pretending to be outraged because the "right" recognizes the alinsky tactics and cloward pivens strategy that obama employs...now we're talking about me being biased...

Apparently age hasn't helped your reading comprehension ability. I was never "outraged because the 'right' recognizes the alinsky tactics." I was just simply pointing out the hypocrisy of decrying them on one hand while using them on the other. As for C-P, you can claim it all you want. I think that's a crock.

Once again I'll tell you I'm not biased toward or against either side. A lie is a lie...corruption is corruption. I won't cover for either side...like some people do...I've been around long enough to have seen how government works and know the truth about politicians.

Your Valiant Centrism is duly noted. Are you done soapboxing yet, and would you mind getting back on topic?
 
The current Republicans have the reputation as the party of "NO!" They don't have a reputation that can be damaged by a shutdown. They have opted to kowtow to their TeaBaggers to their detriment. I repeat, "a flock of birds, a herd of cows, a gaggle of geese, and a Congress of baboons." Some things don't change.

This is truly idiotic. The House of reps has passed budgets each year and sent them to the senate. Each year the Democratic controlled senate refuses to take them up for a vote and they furthermore fail to produce their own. Instead they opt for continuing resolutions. So how is it that the only body that has a large tea party presence is able to pass budgets if they are so problematic? Just amazing at the lack of thought in your post.
 
No I did not ... you're the one who backtracked and claimed you weren't really talking about me.

PARAPHRASE: "Young, naive hyperpartisans ... oh, wait, I didn't mean you!"

You're making things up again. I said what I said...You added all the rest.



Apparently age hasn't helped your reading comprehension ability. I was never "outraged because the 'right' recognizes the alinsky tactics." I was just simply pointing out the hypocrisy of decrying them on one hand while using them on the other.

The left uses them. At least you won't deny that...the right calls them out for it and due to your bias against the right (which you've already admitted) you claim hypocrisy.
It looks like you may be beginning to understanding how politics works...lose the bias and look at things objectively without cheering for one side or the other and you might be on to something.
...and save the ad homs about age and reading comprehension...that stuff is too juvenile

As for C-P, you can claim it all you want. I think that's a crock.

Reality says you're wrong. obama is doing exactly that...You acknowledge the left uses the alinsky model and richard cloward and frances pivens cite alinsky as their inspiration, but ok....sure...have it your way. Believe what you want :lol:
Speaking of cloward pivens again...did you ever find out exactly what the process is? You showed some confusion as to exactly how it works earlier..before you changed the subject...again....see..it has nothing to do with what you claimed earlier, does it? :lol:





Your Valiant Centrism is duly noted. Are you done soapboxing yet, and would you mind getting back on topic?

hahahaha..ok...we can "get back on topic" if you like. I'll accept your concession.

Most people just say "You were right, nice debate".
 
Last edited:
Reid is going to attempt to strip it with only a majority vote.

You are probably right, but that will leave it to go to conference. At that point the house can refuse negotiation, gov would shutdown for only a few hours before the house starts sending department spending authorizations up to the senate one by one and dare the senate to allow the shut down of each individual department to continue. who wins that battle?
 
hahahaha..ok...we can "get back on topic" if you like. I'll accept your concession.

Most people just say "You were right, nice debate".

I'm not conceding anything; you're just starting to bore me.

As far as Cloward-Pivens goes, it was an intentional oversimplification.

Are you done whoring for attention now?
 
Last edited:
I'm not conceding anything; you're just starting to bore me.

Right..sure..but..but...don't you want to stay "on topic"? LMAO...

As far as Cloward-Pivens goes, it was an intentional oversimplification.

So you agree he is using those tactics.

Are you done whoring for attention now?

hahahahahaha...."Whoring for attention" = exposing and embarrassing you...Yeah..LMAO..I'm done. I made my points very well, I think. :lol:
 
Anyone who thinks he does not want a shutdown is a left wing partisan.
 
Back
Top Bottom