Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 139     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next   »
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #121 
This is how much Obama cares about middle class and is killing any kind of wealth to buy voters and power.

http://www.bit.ly/WZmLiX


__________________
Susan
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 19,054
Reply with quote  #122 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spazsdad
Well I guess a $500 increase is just like a $2500 decrease. Isn't that what was said we would see? Now instead of touting savings we will be told "At least they are going up a little less than before"


In our very frequent poster's opinion that increase is really a 'savings'. 

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,776
Reply with quote  #123 
Yup, and taxpayer funding of abortions via Planned Infanticide is future debt reduction.
__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #124 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Here's another chance for me to ask the difference between a Socialist and a Democrat on the left?


A Socialist believes.......

but a left leaning Democrat believes.....


OK Dewey, I'll play along, even though I don't think you were asking me.  I don't know if this is how others see if, but this is how I see it.  I can't cover it all, but I'll give you a few of the biggies:

All left leaning Democrats are not socialists, and all socialist are not necessarily Democrats.  However, this President believes both, so many Democrats are falling in line behind the President, and therefore the lines betwixt them is being blurred.  Some day, we'll wake up from this nightmare, and maybe things will clear up again.

This all just one guy's opinion, and it's free, so that's all it's worth.

A left leaning Democrat believes in....... 

taxpayer-funded abortion; loosening of drug control laws (see - marijuana legalization); homosexual "marriage" as opposed to civil unions; revisionist history being taught in schools; awards for no achievements (the entitlement idea that kicks around so much); increased taxes to pay for more government programs (see differences below for socialism), like unneeded federal school programs, federal intevention in infrastructure development; unnecessary environmental regulation (like artificially high CAFE standards); global warming; wind farms, solar panels, and outlawing coal use will cure global warming; that America has no business defending Israel; that America is not really a superpower, and we can therefore reduce the size of our military and the technological advantage that we have in weapons systems; that all we have to do is apologize to all of the other nations in the world, and they will love us, because all people are innately good, and pure evil does not exist in the world (in short - if we all hold hands and relate to each other, there will be world peace); made-up underserved or oppressed classes of people, who's will must come before the will of the majority to correct for past wrongs; God has no role in public life, and is likely a waste of time in private life (at least the Hebrew and Christian God because we have to be so sensitive to other peoples' "faith").


A socialist believes...... 

that the primary purpose of a centralized government is to provide an equal lifestyle and standard of living for all of its citizens, even if it means confiscating private property and wealth to effect that standard; in fact, confiscation of private property and wealth is a justifiable action, because people are wealthy because they have screwed over non-wealthy people to achieve such wealth; things like innovation, determination, and achievement are really byproducts of government-provided divine providence, and therefore really property of the state; God is not central to life, because the state is more important and omnipotent.

Things that we are seeing occur because of socialist beliefs running rampant right now........ 

Obamacare; redistributionist wealth programs; confiscation of private property and wealth so that it can be redistributed to others; private sector interventions, so as to select the economic winners and losers (Solyndra, unions at GM, teachers unions, etc); unexpirable unemployment and welfare benefits (there is no reason to require folks to earn their own way - we'll just provide for them by taking away wealth from others, because they earned it in immoral fashion anyways); requirements to undertake economic activities that violate your faith (like taxpayer funded abortions, provision of free birth control, recognition of same-sex unions as marriages); pronouncements and teachings that wealth is bad, and wealthy people are corrupt and immoral (to support the case - win the hearts and minds); expansion of handout programs that do not require work to earn; creation of an entitlement society (see- Obamaphone lady - the phone itself wasn't such a big deal, but the whole attitude was extremely disturbing); reductions in payments to doctors (they already make too much anyways); free college to minorities, at the expense of others (remember the pledge to black kids by the POTUS?); illegal immigrant amnesty, because illegals deserve the best of America, same as legal residents.

That's about I can come up with for now.  I'm sure there's more under both topics, but my fingeers are tired.

Notice I did not mention social security, medicare, unemployment benefits in general.  These things all have a place.  The problem is that they have been exploited for other purposes of late.

As I said, this President believes most of the Democrat platform and the socialist platform, and is taking the country in that direction.  With it, he is taking the Democrat party into the socialist sphere, because Democrats are afraid to speak up.

Hope that helps you some in your research project....
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #125 
mikec - You are always welcome to answer my questions as they are open to all.  Thanks.  With regards to your definition of Socialist, I don't know anyone who believes all those descriptions so I see no current politician deserving of the Socialist label.  As for left leaning Democrat, many of your descriptions are way off, imo.  Who wants unnecessary or unneeded anything?  Rather than address each of these many descriptions, a good teacher can give examples to help clarify the definition.  I'd like you to give me an example of a left leaning Democrat and explain why they are not a Socialist, using the distinctions in your post.  Republicans used to be on board with national health insurance so I'm having difficulty fully understanding your long and well thought out post.  I need more help to make it understandable to me.  Can you give me some clear examples?

Secondly, I'd like your opinion regarding me.  I am for a Progressive tax system and for an estate tax.  I am for the Government investing in medical and technological breakthroughs as the private community may not have the financial incentive to do so.  I am for the central role of a Government when it comes to a safety net for society.  I am for the Government collecting funds to build roads, bridges, etc.  I believe it is the role of the Government to make certain all children have access to a quality education.  Lastly, I am for national health insurance and would probably prefer a single payer system.  I think it is a good idea for society to pitch in financially in order to receive security, (police, firemen, FAA controllers, military defense, etc.), just as I think it is a good idea for society to pitch in financially to receive appropriate health care.  I believe it is the role of a Government to make certain health care, safety, and security are being provided to all of its citizens.  Does this make me a Socialist and do you have a Democrat in mind who would differ with me on these various positions?
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #126 
You're killing me buddy.

Maybe you don't know anyone who believes all of that, but I believe that Pelosi and Obama believe it all.

I think Schumer is more of a Democrat than a socialist.  I think Reid actually has few convictions above getting reelected (see - his handout to the NRA in Obamacare) and being an antagonist towards those whose opinion differs from his own (usually Republicans, but not always).  Somehow, he is also immune to any sorts of societal norms, and he shames his position by doing things like making up rumors (Romney not filing tax returns) and suggesting to Obama that he not follow Constitutional requirements.

Certainly, you and others may not believe some of the things I cited as unnecessary.  Forgive the editorializing of my own viewpoint.


EDIT - so, are you or anyone or your side now going to answer my question relative to cops in schools?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
mikec - You are always welcome to answer my questions as they are open to all.  Thanks.  With regards to your definition of Socialist, I don't know anyone who believes all those descriptions so I see no current politician deserving of the Socialist label.  As for left leaning Democrat, many of your descriptions are way off, imo.  Who wants unnecessary or unneeded anything?  Rather than address each of these many descriptions, a good teacher can give examples to help clarify the definition.  I'd like you to give me an example of a left leaning Democrat and explain why they are not a Socialist, using the distinctions in your post.  Republicans used to be on board with national health insurance so I'm having difficulty fully understanding your long and well thought out post.  I need more help to make it understandable to me.  Can you give me some clear examples?
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 19,054
Reply with quote  #127 
so you see mike, you spent a half hour of your life on a very well thought out and well presented comparison, definition and distinction between the two.  sorry, not good enough for the taskmaster. 

My conclusion from your post and also from my excerpt from the New World Encyclopedia, that I quoted on page 4, is that the lines between the two are very blurred right now.  Sometimes it takes awhile for an alcoholic to admit he/she is an alcoholic and many deny it, the left likewise is having a hard time accepting the fact they are practicing socialists.

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #128 
KIR - it's OK.  I'm working right now, and writing that was a nice diversion.  Better get back to it before I get the heave-ho.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #129 
mikec - I think we are getting close.  Are you saying Schumer is not a Socialist and Pelosi is?  This is what I've been asking for.  Now tell me what Pelosi believes that Schumer doesn't and I'll begin to have some understanding.  Please ignore keepinitreal because he does not, (is unable), to define the distinction so I may more easily understand.  He doesn't want you to explain it to me either.

I understand if a politician wants to take a rich man's house and give it to a poor man, that will fit your Socialist label.  I know of no Democrat who wants to do any such thing but I would agree with your definition if this were the case.  If you are saying this is what Pelosi wants to do, but not Schumer, I'd like to know what makes you say such.  Thanks. 

PS:  I can't find your question on cops in schools but if you're asking if I mind if schools hire cops to patrol, my answer is no.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 19,054
Reply with quote  #130 
LOL, this exercise in futility has been tried by CoachB25, pabar, FIB, 10er, grizzly, bhblue, swifty, slideby, woody, myself and many others.  the more you answer and get yourself entrapped in the spiderweb of these discussions, which is dewey's intent, the more you will get frustrated with the games.  The 'target' is always moving.  when you get close to the answer as Susan, bless her heart, continues to do, he will step out for a cigar.
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #131 
I don't mind debating Dewey about it, but any time now Masare will call me a racist, and Cal...Sox will call me all sorts of names that would get me banned if I directed them at others.

Dewey - I'll reply later - I gotta get back to work.  Ok, really, I'm working at home, and my alma mater has a BBall game tipping off, so it's time to hit the sofa.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #132 
mikec - Keepinitreal is right about one thing, none of the individuals he mentioned want to provide a clear example distinguishing the differences between a left leaning Democrat and a Socialist.  I am pushing for this distinction because it is my position that most of you on the Right inside here, who often use this term, equate a Democrat and Socialist as one and the same.  This is what I'm trying to get across in a nutshell.

When somebody calls me, or one of our politicians far left, I always ask how that differs from left but never get a distinction.  For example, in my book, asking for all drugs to be made legal would be far left and maybe far right.

Many in here will call me a Socialist and then when I ask what opinions have I presented in this forum that Clinton would not have agreed with, silence.  I think sbmom might have said all Dems, including Clinton, are Socialists but maybe my memory fails me.  Anyway, how hard can it be to pull out a couple of examples, point to a record or a speech, and illustrate the differences.  I can't get this information here and I say it's because they believe all Democrats are Socialists.  Agreeing I'm right would take the sting out of the accusation but showing I'm wrong is impossible.

PS:  Thanks mike.  Have a good day.  By the way, I don't think anyone capable of banning folks comes around anymore.
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #133 
Dewey - I don't know every position of very politician. However, Schumer seems to me to be a partisan. I may not agree, but that's fine. At least he has some semblance of conviction. Clinton (Bill, not Hillary), began as a democrat, with one or two socialist ideas, and morphed into a survival-driven pragmatist, which brought him towards the middle and salvaged his legacy.

Pelosi seems to be redistributionist. As soon as the fiscal cliff deal was announced, the first she she says is "we have to tax more". For Obamacare, she seemed to me to be less concerned with people's welfare, and more concerned with sticking it to the man. I feel like Obama is like Pelosi. It's more about retribution, "fairness" as they define it, and redistribution.

My opinions only. I'm not going to invest hours in finding specific speeches. That's how I see them, based upon my memory of seeing them talk.

So - if these labels offend you so much, why? What do you think the difference is?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #134 
mikec - The labels don't offend me...I just like showing how ridiculous throwing them out there looks.  Left wing loons, far left, Socialist, etc., are laughable terms in my opinion.  I would think anyone wishing to use them could illustrate precisely what they mean and why they apply to one person and not another.  If you want to admit Conservatives think all Democrats are Socialists, then this discussion is over.  If you want to apply the term to somebody, then I still wish to know why they deserve the label as opposed to another.  Very simple from my perspective.  I understand some will think a few Democrats are more Socialist than others but that isn't the question.  If Democrat/Socialist is not one and the same, in the opinion of the Right, then feel free to give me a Dem that isn't a Socialist and explain why.  This is my only interest in this game.  Well that and taking the sting out of the term Socialist, mostly aimed at this President, as if he is somehow different than any of the rest of us Democrats.  Just a pet peeve of mine.

mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #135 
I think I tried. The PORUS, in my view, espouses socialist economic and social policies. I know you don't agree, but I tried to explain my thoughts.

All Democrats are not socialized in my view.. I tried to explain that too.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #136 
mikec - Well how about me?  I gave you several positions I hold?  Am I a Socialist?  What puts me over or keeps me short?  Somewhere out there is a clear explanation.  I think what you told me is some Democrats are more left than others.  That part I can understand.  Unless they want to take your home and give it to another, I can't see where any of them are Socialists.  If Progressive tax rates are considered the same concept, then all Dems are Socialist in the opinion of the Right.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 19,054
Reply with quote  #137 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
mikec - The labels don't offend me......................

.....................Well that and taking the sting out of the term Socialist, mostly aimed at this President, as if he is somehow different than any of the rest of us Democrats.  Just a pet peeve of mine.



You should seek consistency. They either offend you or they don't.  The leftists have many names for the right.  You admitted you watch John Stewart and Bill Maher, you've heard the names and laughed about it.

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #138 
You are going to have to find the post where I said I laugh at Progressives calling Republicans names.  Just another misleading comment thrown out into the community.  I keep saying, your side has to have a better and more accurate message.

PS:  The label doesn't offend me.  I already know most of the Right thinks Obama is a Socialist.  It's the idea they think he is some unusual and different kind of Democrat President.  That's the part I don't like and am trying to expose.  Whether you think we are all Socialists or not is irrelevant.  But he is no different in ideological aspects than the Clintons or most other Democrats.
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #139 
The difference, I think, is partially related to your motivations. Like Schumer, or maybe some others, you are motivated, I think, by a belief system that extends beyond "stick it to the man" and "redistribute the I'll-gotten wealth". Common ground, though elusive, may he attainable, at least in some areas.

However, Obama has you hooked, and is dragging you to the dark side .

We'll grant you a visa when we split, though, unlike a few others here.

Last - I don't think I've called you any names or labels, but you asked.

It's OK though, cause I'm a right-wing racist heartless nut job according to the definitions espoused by some of your compadres here. I can live with it.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #140 
Clinton and Obama both think in terms I subscribe to.  Rather easy to be pulled over to their side.  As for secession, I remember your side having a good laugh when Mr. Baldwin suggested he was leaving.  I don't believe any of this type talk does our Country much good but I get you're joking and I sure hope you stay on this side.  Like masare said, we need a good alternative Party.  I think you have the right attitude and probably have Progressive friends too.  We need your kind to stick around.

PS:  You added those last two lines while I was editing.  You are none of those things but you better be careful carrying on cordial conversations with me.
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #141 
As I've wondered before, I fear that the country has become so fractured politically that I wonder if it is repairable.

My own view is that gov't works best from the middle. We are in a loop of swinging one way, then the other. These big swings are not helpful.

I am born of original colonists - I go with my state.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #142 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec
As I've wondered before, I fear that the country has become so fractured politically that I wonder if it is repairable.


Did this fear begin August 13, 2009?
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 6,865
Reply with quote  #143 
No, it began with the impeachment proceedings against Clinton for me, and has only gotten worse since, in both directions.
Wolfpackfan

Registered:
Posts: 1,918
Reply with quote  #144 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25
One of the authors of the Affordable Health Care Act came out today and said that it is true that by the end of 2013, we might be paying twice the cost we are currently paying for our health care.  HUMMMMMMM!
AHHH.....I USED TO PAY ZERO THEN $60. NOW $236 A MONTH!!!! GOT TO SAY I AM NOT A FAN OF OBAMA CARE

__________________
Go Pack!!!!!!!!!!!
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #145 
I remember the good ol' days when our health insurance premiums didn't rise.  NOT!!!
Wolfpackfan

Registered:
Posts: 1,918
Reply with quote  #146 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
I remember the good ol' days when our health insurance premiums didn't rise.  NOT!!!
Are you intentionally trying to irritate me today

__________________
Go Pack!!!!!!!!!!!
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #147 
Wolfpackfan - I would never do that to a fellow wolfpack fan.  My ol' man was a 27th rounder fullback out of Nevada-Reno in 1950, (Green Bay).  Unfortunately, or otherwise, the draft is as far as it went.  Lost him 26 years ago but I'm still running this little hole-in-the-wall manufacturing business he and I started long ago.
B10IS1

Registered:
Posts: 624
Reply with quote  #148 
I think the point is that Obama said cost of healthcare would go down.  NOT!!!
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,776
Reply with quote  #149 
Obama lied.
__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,391
Reply with quote  #150 
Quote:
Originally Posted by B10IS1
I think the point is that Obama said cost of healthcare would go down.  NOT!!!


The goal of the AHCA, along with increasing access to health care, is to shrink the significantly escalating growth in our National health care expenditures to a more feasible number.  These costs include everything including Medicare, health insurance premiums, medicine, etc.  What we spend in this Country is growing too rapidly, for many different reasons, and unless we want to sacrifice significantly in other areas, we need to get a handle on areas that need not be driving costs up more.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: