It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Acceptable Propaganda & Removal of Filibuster/Judges

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enigmatic_Messiah
Ofcourse I can take outside criticism but I'd rather not have it coming from a bunch of smug twerp that doesn't understand the issues and the direct influence they have here. I'm tired of the elitest attitude your type have and the nonsense about USA always commiting atrocitity's. Every country has & does, and it isn't just militarily. You can cause atrocity's with currency & loans, such as in Africa. All western nations are guilty of causing atrocity's.


Yes, I do know the system better than you. You have no idea the direct result of bankruptcy legislation that will be in effect within six months, do you? The direct effect the government has on my daily affairs is the reason I know more about my political system than you do. For instance, if you watch the History Channel and they have a program about Hitler, does it make you an expert on Hitler? Duh! No, it does not!

[edit on 16-4-2005 by Enigmatic_Messiah]




ahh so the troll comes out!

This wasnt about you, I dont really care what the effects are on yourself to be honest, I was stating a simple fact that being a US citizen doesnt automatically make you better qualified to talk about US politics. Did I say anything about atrocities in this thread? guilty conscience? Of course all nations are guilty of committing atrocities on one level or another, but the US is as guilty of atrocities much harsher than many western nations, and has done hundreds of foreign interventions in its history. It's just fact, try and accept it.

My comment about Edsinger is simple. This guy thinks America is invincible. That's not true. America suffers the same internal and external problems that many other states offer, the only difference is the amount of money and people that are in the US.

Your example of the history channel makes no sense since it is obviously a historical piece that goes for an hour and can cover 15 to 20 years yet I live in the present every day seeing such things unfold in the US political spectrum.

If you really can't hack non US citizens talking in your US political threads, you might as well leave now, because you dont seem to understand what this site is about, nor could you ever value the importance of another viewpoint nor one that could possibly be more objective than yours.

hmm, so bankruptcy leigislation? well the republicans and their lobbyists have been pushing that since '97 and since they got greater control of the senate in '02 and ofcourse in the '04 election it has allowed them to pass reforms that are big business friendly. The bill's title is amusing, its called the 'bankruptcy abuse protection and consumer protection act of 2005' because it sure wont help protect the average consumer, nor the thousands of people who will declare bankruptcy.

The most incredulous thing about it is that these same corporations who are lobbying for changes encourage and bombard people to spend money and to live the consumer lifestyle and do not believe in for instance socialized healthcare. So what happens is that the increasing pressures of the consumer lifestyle has created a lack of savings among most Americans(at a pitiful 0.3%), which gives them little to fall back on and considering how much the avg American household borrows for home loans and credit cards it makes the situation even worse. American consumer debt is at a whopping 2trillion dollars, or around 20% of GDP. Another recession or decline in the economy will obviously cause people to lose their jobs and then they will find themselves deluged in a mountain of debt, they may have to declare bankruptcy, and all this will do for them is make it harder just because some people are believed to abuse laws that are too 'lax'.

Now this 'amendment' to federal bankruptcy laws will not only be hard on small and medium businesses, but also your avg working and middle class joe. Filing for a clean sweep chapter 7 will be harder. What will happen is that many consumers will have to file for the chapter 13 bankruptcy, which is a scheduled repayment of debt for a 3 to 5 year period. Approximately anywhere from 30,000 to 210,000 bankruptcy filers will have to do this, which are conservative estimates. Also, a means test will have to be made to determine a consumers ability to repay debt (or as the bill put it, a formulae) and anyone who is above the states median income and who can pay back over around $6,000 from 3 to 5 years will be forced by a judge to take a chapter 13.

Now my problem with this is that most bankruptcies are unwilling. Not only that, half of bankruptcies are declared due to large medical bills due to America's lack of a proper socialized healthcare system, and in turn most of these people have health insurance!

The lobbyists and their political pawns (mostly republicans mind you) like to label these people gamblers, impulsive shoppers and divorced parents who aren't paying child support. The fact of the matter is that this isnt true.

In 2003 1.6 million non business bankruptcies were made (though the number fell 3% in 2004).

This bill is obviously pro-large business and pro-credit corporations and I disagree with friends of mine and friends of my parents being subjected to harsher bankruptcy laws. Can you really handle that? Or will you just continue to be yet another political troll noob looking for a fight on ATS?

thanks,
drfunk




posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
The lobbyists and their political pawns (mostly republicans mind you) like to label these people gamblers, impulsive shoppers and divorced parents who aren't paying child support. The fact of the matter is that this isnt true.


Also, did you know that 54% declare bankruptcy citing healthcare costs. Impulsive gambling was 1.4%. (According to NYT)



In 2003 1.6 million non business bankruptcies were made (though the number fell 3% in 2004).

This bill is obviously pro-large business and pro-credit corporations and I disagree with friends of mine and friends of my parents being subjected to harsher bankruptcy laws. Can you really handle that? Or will you just continue to be yet another political troll noob looking for a fight on ATS?


I'm a troll? Hahahaha! Go back to kindergarden.

That completely through response full of bs still proves my point. You do not understand our government and the direct impact of the laws. You compare it to the "harsher" laws on your parents, I find "incredulous" of you to do that.




Originally posted by drfunk
the only cure is for America to finally go down the drain, then there will be a reality check


Who is looking for the fight? I realize you were talking about edsinger but it is offensive because you added nothing to the thread plus it showed a anti-american sentiment. When someone writes, "the only cure is for America to finally go down the drain."--No matter the context, I get a little offended and it isn't because I am infiltrated with propaganda, it is because I am proud of the history and culture I've grown up in. Just as Russians are proud to be Russian, and Romanians are proud to be Romanian and proud of the history of Count Dracula, and just as British admire the British Monarch. It is not a matter of propaganda, but loyalty.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   
it's the only cure for people edsinger to get a reality check. What's wrong with that? context is everything read again :

"RANT we both know there's no hope for people like Edsinger, the only cure is for America to finally go down the drain, then there will be a reality check"

Edsinger and I have debated a lot in a variety of forums on a variety of issues. I know his type and I believe its the only way that Edsinger will see the truth. I didnt say america needs to be cured, i said that the only cure for Edsinger to see the truth is for America to go down the drain. See the difference context makes?




Also, did you know that 54% declare bankruptcy citing healthcare costs. Impulsive gambling was 1.4%. (According to NYT)


Yes I did, you should of read my previous post more fully.



Now my problem with this is that most bankruptcies are unwilling. Not only that, half of bankruptcies are declared due to large medical bills due to America's lack of a proper socialized healthcare system, and in turn most of these people have health insurance!


If you read my entire post properly I was stating that those who pushed for this bill (the republicans) and those who voted for this bill (mostly republicans) label people who are bankrupt as gamblers and impulsive shoppers who get a free ride on chapter 7 . Divide and conquer, villify a certain group with distortion of facts and it gives justification for amendments that aren't in the interest of the people, but the almighty dollar.


Did you know that most of these people had health insurance as well?




I'm a troll? Hahahaha! Go back to kindergarden.


You are being one, because you particularly attacked a certain group of people who you believe haven't got a right to have a say in your discussion. Foreigners, people who make up a large part of this community.




That completely through response full of bs still proves my point. You do not understand our government and the direct impact of the laws. You compare it to the "harsher" laws on your parents, I find "incredulous" of you to do that.


it's not bs. it's the truth. The bill is pro-business and pro-credit. 1.6 million non-business bankruptcies were made in 2004. 30,000 to 210,000 of these bankruptcies (which are conservative estimates) will be forced to file chapter 13 bankruptcy instead of chapter 7. These people will be debt ridden. This will benefit credit companies and retailers more than anyone. It sure isn't benefitting a middle class or working class person who has just lost their job and is forced to file for bankruptcy does it?

Once again you really should read everything before you open your mouth :




This bill is obviously pro-large business and pro-credit corporations and I disagree with friends of mine and friends of my parents being subjected to harsher bankruptcy laws. Can you really handle that? Or will you just continue to be yet another political troll noob looking for a fight on ATS?


you can't understand that I am interested in what effects this will have on my American friends and my parents friends who are currently residing in the United States??? I am allowed an opinion, and I disagree with them being subjected to harsher bankruptcy laws. Understand?

Anyways stop trolling and looking to pick a fight, if you want to be a good member of the community you wont try and exclude and discriminate against other ATS members because they don't carry a piece of paper saying they are citizens of the United States.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   


RANT we both know there's no hope for people like Edsinger, the only cure is for America to finally go down the drain, then there will be a reality check


I do think your taking this statement the wrong way Enigmatic_Messiah I dont believe Dr Funk means this in a disrespectful way at all, it strikes me as a statement of lost hope and desperation more then anything else. In fact I tend to agree with it, though sometimes I think even a scenario as catastrophic as that wont change the views of some of these people. The mindcontrol runs too deep Im afraid.

More seriously though this is a good thread you have started here on ATS Enigmatic_Messiah and an important one I might add. Far too important to be an Americans only discussion in my opinion. Granted nonamericans may not be as connected to America and by extension grasp exactly what it's like here but they can still offer very pertinent comments and frankly we need as much help as we can get to combat this menace. Some of the finest minds in TSA are NonAmericans and to exclude them would only hamstring this thread and decrease its lifespan.

Much like europe with Radical Islam we have allowed a viper to grow unchecked in our democracy that threatens us all. It has used our tolerance against us and perverted our political processes to spread its vile agenda and protect itself from rectification. We have allowed it to spread so far it has nearly consumed us. Petty bickering has got us to this point whats on my mind though is are we too late to turn back and if we're not then what do we do to change things?

I sure as heck dont know is there anyone out there who does?

By the way I dont want to hear any pat responses of "get involved inlocal politics" running for local office isnt going to save us from the ravening horde posed to take us back to the dark ages. Me running for NYC councilman will have no affect on the political ambitions of moral maniacs from middle america.
So lets be realistic here we need a plan short of voting I dont know how to combat this trend.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 04:41 AM
link   


I do think your taking this statement the wrong way Enigmatic_Messiah I dont believe Dr Funk means this in a disrespectful way at all, it strikes me as a statement of lost hope and desperation more then anything else. In fact I tend to agree with it, though sometimes I think even a scenario as catastrophic as that wont change the views of some of these people. The mindcontrol runs too deep Im afraid.


thank you sir! i've been debating and arguing with edsingers type for so long there's no real way of making them see the truth or the light, that i feel its the only thing that will work, a reality check.

Facts and truth are distortions and lies to them, 'liberal bias'. Or, if that doesnt work, its 'billary's' fault or even the UN.

And I agree with you that it could take something even more to change the views of some people.

peace,
drfunk

[edit on 17-4-2005 by drfunk]



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by boogyman
Much like europe with Radical Islam we have allowed a viper to grow unchecked in our democracy that threatens us all. It has used our tolerance against us and perverted our political processes to spread its vile agenda and protect itself from rectification. We have allowed it to spread so far it has nearly consumed us. Petty bickering has got us to this point whats on my mind though is are we too late to turn back and if we're not then what do we do to change things?

I sure as heck dont know is there anyone out there who does?

So lets be realistic here we need a plan short of voting I dont know how to combat this trend.


I believe that Jefferson has the solution, he had a few words of wisdom :

"The ultimate arbiter is the people of the Union."

"Whenever our affairs go obviously wrong, the good sense of the people will interpose and set them to rights."

"Our fellow citizens have been led hoodwinked from their principles by a most extraordinary combination of circumstances. But the band is removed, and they now see for themselves."

What I believe is that Jefferson believed that the ultimate check on the government was the ultimate authority, the will of the people. The problem is getting the people motivated in todays society to do so. If things keep going the way they are (this continual farse of division that the political parties play and the continual selling out of the people's interests that has been going on far too long) that revolution may be the best way to go.

"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [i.e., securing inherent and inalienable rights, with powers derived from the consent of the governed], it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

and my personal favourite :

"What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

What would he say if he were alive today?

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   
As a non-Christian, I do not feel attacked when there is criticism aimed at Christians in public sector. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that if you are Christian, and want to worship GOD, then worship in Church, and practice your religion in PRIVATE. If you are morally outraged, then do something about it in a non-secular way in PUBLIC. If you cannot stomach giving prescribed drugs to non-christians because of your BELIEFS, then don't be a public pharmacist. If you cannot stomach taking care of the public- who may not be Christians, then don't do public work.

What a rush it must be for Christians to jump on the rightousness bandwagon and combine the power of politics with religion. As you judge, so will you be judged. Hopefully this Christian fervor will be put to good use, and churches will become more helpful to their constituents- but if they are going to act like hypocrites, then I'm afraid we , as American will be no better than the Taliban that we love to denigrate.



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk

Facts and truth are distortions and lies to them, 'liberal bias'. Or, if that doesnt work, its 'billary's' fault or even the UN.


Anyways, I'm a liberal.


Let's agree to disagree?



Thread goes back to normal.......



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enigmatic_Messiah
I'm a troll? Hahahaha! Go back to kindergarden.



pssst! By the way it's spelled "kindergarten". When you hurl insults it's best to get your facts straight.


There's no propaganda here. This is simply politics as usual. The Democratic party is abusing the filibuster rule for political gain when the Constitution states that the President only needs "advice and consent" of the Senate to nominate these judges. Note how in the ratification of treaties it clearly differs in that 2/3 are required to concur. Approval of judges only needs a majority of votes.

So the Republicans have every right to vote on the judges the President nominates. But there is a catch. In order to leave committee and get the vote of the full Senate, we need 60 Senators approval, which the Republicans can't get. Fine! The Constitution says that the Senate and Congress are to make up their own rules, so the Republicans can just make up a rule that you only need a simple majority for cloture in judicial nominations.

Not so fast! Senate Rule XXII says that they will need a full 2/3 vote to change any rules in the Senate. But now the Republicans can make a new rule saying that the Rule XXII was wrong and unconstitutional.

And on and on this goes. The more I dig into this, the more I can see that this is nothing more than political bantering. Each side is convinced that they are right. Neither side is breaking the law or doing anything Unconstitutional. In short, it's politics as usual.

You should read this article which clearly explains both sides and even questions if the constitution is constitutional. I know it sounds crazy, but was anything in politics ever completely sane?



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 11:50 PM
link   
So, why did you warn me? (dbates) Do you disagree with the content or something?



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
ahh so the troll comes out!


Ok, it really irks me that I get a warning for saying, "go back to kindergarden". (spelled incorrectly) And am told that it was an insult. The first insult to me is being called a stereotypical "troll" which added insult to a non-insulting debate thus far. First of all, let me explain myself. In my opinion using the word troll to describe a person is silly and that is why I said, "go back to kindergarden".

Silly warning for a silly remark from a silly post on a silly place.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
troll is not an insult, it is what you were being. You were discriminating and being insulting to another member and an entire portion of the ATS community by implying because I or any other non-US citizen are ignorant just because we do not carry a card saying i am a citizen of the United States. I also gave you some plusses to why a foreign viewpoint is excellent and not only that a decent explanation of my problem with amendments to bankruptcy legislation plus also the fact that I have friends and my parents have friends who are residing in the US and that this will effect them, yet another reason it would interest me. I also said I will remain courteous, which I have so far.

Yet you keep going.

here is where the insulting started :

"a bunch of smug twerp that doesn't understand the issues and the direct influence they have here"

and also another attack on me about things i havent even commented on this thread :

"'m tired of the elitest attitude your type have and the nonsense about USA always commiting atrocitity's. Every country has & does, and it isn't just militarily. You can cause atrocity's with currency & loans, such as in Africa. All western nations are guilty of causing atrocity's. "

So I get called these names, after I said I will remain courteous?

just give it up dude.. there's no reason to keep attacking ppl on this thread. Stop trolling and keep a cool head.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
RANT we both know there's no hope for people like Edsinger, the only cure is for America to finally go down the drain, then there will be a reality check


And it was insulting that you didn't respect my wishes as the thread author.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
"Brazil has granted asylum to deposed Ecuadorean President Lucio Gutierrez, who had taken refuge in the Brazilian embassy since his ouster Wednesday.

Brazilian Ambassador Sergio Florencia says he hopes Mr. Gutierrez's transfer to Brazil will take place as soon as possible.

Mr. Gutierrez fled to the embassy after he was removed from office Wednesday by the Ecuadorean Congress following a week of massive street protests against his administration."

www.politinfo.com...



see what happens when you start messing with the top justices of a country!!

"The crisis began last December, when Mr. Gutierrez fired 27 of the 31 justices on the Supreme Court after accusing them of bias against him. The move prompted weeks of street protests."

(from the same article..)



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Very good post, dawnstar. I appreciate you bringing something noteworthy to the conversation.
I am afraid it is similiar to what Republicans wish to do, but they want to set-up a Red State dynasty by doing this......its sad.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   
ahhh....they just want to expand the bible belt to the rest of us, that's all.......
there's been alot of gov'ts falling from just the people protesting....unless it's another country...(the US??)... meddling, it's awfully weird!!!



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   
You should read the article called "The Crusaders" in Rolling Stone magazine, I bought it expecting to read about the "Immortals; The 100 greatest artist of all time" but the political commentary titled the crusaders was very telling and gave a very interesting perspective of their.........christian ideals and reasons to force them on all people?



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
those christian ideas that many of them chose to ignore when it becomes too tough to follow through on them?
ya, they really want to impose them on the rest of us, don't they?
I think they've gone off the deep end, or lost the meaning or the words, or something!



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I can see the Democratic parties, thoughts on this matter. Most of the Supreme court appointees have come from the appeals courts, and if these conservative judges get appointed then that's one more chance of having a pro-life judge in the Supreme Court. These judges don't pass the single issue agenda (abortion) so they are stalling in hopes that the Republicans will give up on this issue.

The Democrats are actually being suckered into this fight and are making a HUGE mistake. Here's why. As we know there are a couple of the Supreme court justices that are reaching retirement age. Rehnquist is 75 and Stevens is 80. They are pretty sure bets for retirement in the next 4 years.

Knowing that the nominations of conservative judges to the Supreme Court could be filibustered, Pres. Bush set up the Democrats by nominating what they would consider extremely conservative judges for the appeals courts. Playing right in to his hands, the Democrats filibuster forcing the Republican senators into changing senate committee rules.

Now when it comes time for the Supreme Court nominations, the senate rules will only require 51 votes to bring the nominees to a full house vote instead of the current 60. Once it reaches the floor, a simple majority is all that's required to confirm the President's nominees.

In short, the Democrats are using their big guns on the pawns instead of waiting for more valuable pieces to come into play. I think they would get more sympathy if they waited till the Supreme court nominees came up before the used the filibuster. This whole ordeal is being blow of proportion so the Republicans can get their Supreme Court positions later.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Ouch, good point dbates. Using all their amunition on the pawns when they need to wait and trap the bishops, wait for the tower's to make a move, then take out the queen, and then they can trap the King.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join