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.

 

Democrats are attempting ruin of economy in election year

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Quoting DEEZNUTZ
"I read a post by one person stating that the EU is attempting to influence U.S. economic policy with these tarrifs on steel imports from the US. Gee when doesn't the U.S. try to influence a foreign power to get what they want."


Influencing economic policy is one thing, influencing an election is an entirely different thing. Its not right for us to do - and its not right for anyone to do here.

Your points about trade fairness are noted and for the most part true, America will do what it takes to keep its economy going.




posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
Yes I can blame the Republican House, Senate and President for an economy that has produced the highest individaul homeownship in history, an unemployment rate lower that the average of the entire 1990's when dems had control, record economic growth in general - especially in the small business sector that is the true backbone of the economic engine.


False. It's, as usual, a warped perception of statistics, gleaned from the Right Wing website dujour's talking points, that has you touting the party line.
Here's a thought: try holding off on party politics until you're at least in your mid 20's, maybe even 30.

Maybe then you'd have the good sense to read some of the riders attached to legislation that will make these Republican Congressmen & this GOP White House core areas of study for future poli sci curriculums....they'll probably be refered to as the Dark Ages.

The numbers are not there to have any Democrat initiative pushed through. But before that - a big unofficial rule of engagement that you should follow on ATS that other 'Left Wing' & 'Right Wing' members have followed:
- No compromised sources entered into discussion as 'facts'. The vast majority of your links supporting your argument are as credible as X-Ray specs or Spanish Fly. Grover Norquist came to life as a dingleberry on Prescott Bush's NADS after a brief exposure to gamma rays........meaning HE'S NOT A CREDIBLE SOURCE!


From your Forbes link:

- "The Senate became deadlocked this week...
Deadlocks occur when there are equal numbers......with this Senate, that can only occur with multiple Republicans siding with the Democrats.

- "Senate Republican leaders halted debate on the bill Wednesday due to the loss of a crucial vote that would have required action on a Democratic-sponsored amendment to bar the Bush administration from changes in overtime rules.
As with the here to fore unheard of action taken by Senate Republicans in keeping open the Medicare bill vote 3 addittional hours ( a vote is only supposed to be open for 15 minutes )so that they could bribe and blackmail sensible conservatives to vote for that awful piece of legislation, they again saw common sense winning out over ideology with sensible Republicans and halted proceedings until they could rig the game again.

The issue of over time is critical to the segment of the US workforce that runs our economy. It's something that the White House has taken the very wrong position on. Being a consumer based economy as we are, cutting OT takes out massive chunks of what has kept us above water throught out the Bush years right after military spending....consumer spending.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 12:56 PM
link   
BT, you have fallen into the oh so predictable liberal clap trap of attacking the messenger when you disagree with the information at hand.

Quoting,
"No compromised sources entered into discussion as 'facts"

Rather than address the real issue which is the democrats action in the senate that is very detrimental to existing and future employment, you would rather attack someone with whom you disagree on politics, never addressing the issue.

Then you find it neccesary to attack personally by implying that I am young and uninformed,

Quoting,
"Here's a thought: try holding off on party politics until you're at least in your mid 20's, maybe even 30."

For your future reference I am old enough to remember when the word "democrat" did'nt make me fear for the safety of my country nor grab for my wallet.

The poly sci course most popular in the future will be "Obstructionism - how to stop it", why the country was betrayed by neo- democrats"

As for the Forbes story you can see that it was picked up from Reuters - not exactly known as a conservative source.

When an illegal supermajority of 60 is required to get bills passed, deadlock occurs with no republican crossing the aisle.

The issue of overtime is moot when one loses their job because cynical election year games are played with it.
Besides the OT question being important, are not actual jobs even more so. I think the dems just used that as a smokescreen anyway in their effort to make things as bad as they can before the election.

Mostly I am surprised and appalled that people are trying to defend this action when it means unequivocal job losses for the very people the democratic party is supposed to represent. Thats hypocracy in its highest form.


Maybe they should rename the party, let me suggest one that is more apt now than its ever been - "hypocratic" party. Kerry is the perfect standard bearer.

Then the spin could be the name means "super" or has a conotation of "medic" but we'll all know the "real" meaning no matter the spin.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
For your future reference I am old enough to remember when the word "democrat" did'nt make me fear for the safety of my country nor grab for my wallet.


That would have been the 90's. Big deal. And for the record I've been around quite a while and CAN'T remember a time practically any Republican speaking on the Senate floor didn't make me want to puke. Some of the Presidents were passable however. Barely.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Sorry RANT that would be the sixties and before - maybe before your time?

BTW, are'nt moderators supposed to be making sure "Ranting" stays in the pit?


Seriously though can you defend the democrats job killing obstruction of the tariff bill, Is'nt there a point where the good of the nation comes into play when it comes to jobs over politics?

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Phoenix]



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I just don't buy the spin that there's a global conspiracy being covertly led by the Democratic party to destroy the US economy so that one man can claim the executive office. The charge is hardly worthy of comment. I wouldn't believe anyone saying there was such a Republican conspiracy, why should I take your spin seriously?

You're right in that I'm not responding to the charge other than rolling my eyes. I guess I'll just ignore it next time.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I don't recall anyone saying this is a global conspiracy. It's the Democrat's War Room and their eliteist, "fake socialist" agenda behind it. That certainly isn't global.

What we have here though is a US Senator consulting with "foreign leaders" (Kerry's words) about our internal politics. Make you wonder what kind of promises he has made to his foreign friends in return for the support he says he has from them. In my view, this is every bit as bad if not worse as the Clinton/Gore campaign accepting donations from China.

If it goes like that did, Kerry will get elected and in a year or two we'll hear about France and Germany suddenly making really big strides in some highly technical field that previously the US had the edge on.

BTW, I'm 40. Do I have permission to consider politics now? Am I mature enough to be thnking about such weightly and important matters? Geez.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 02:36 PM
link   
You're right in that I'm not responding to the charge other than rolling my eyes. I guess I'll just ignore it next time.

Ok, but tell me this - if jobs are lost due to the tariff bill not passing will you rightly place the blame where it belongs?

Will you ignore it then? time will tell.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
.."Why is everybody against America" banter that seems to be prevelent on this page. Do you people learn any history when you go to school? Do you follow the news?



I dont believe everyone is against America with their banter no more than raising a 'disapointing' teenager, that you still love. You just wish he would listen more, and act more responsible.


Clinton had a huge budget surplus. This was due to massive budget cuts in the military as well as not lowering the public and corporate tax rate when times were good. (the bubble). Americans were illegally overtaxed, and it sure looked good for the dems didnt it.


Bush takes over AT the point of collapse, and tax revenues dropped like a rock when people became unemployed and businesses faultered, and capital gains evaporated. Yes he refunded some taxes, but IMO was to correct the wrong from the prior leadership's irresponsability.


And now we got this billion dollar a day war thing going on everywhere. No help to the budget.

The defecit is also partly due to currency inbalences and fluctuations that have not gone they way of the dollar, as well as falsely low interest rates.


I do not hate America, but pointing out concerns or issue's, or wondering why whatever isnt being addressed, is my right and responsability as a citizen, as there is no other way to publically address issues or questions otherwise, and hopefully instigate some action by public consensus.
(although some folks do take things to the other side negetively.)


Talk like that is what brought the Constitution and other docs, to reality. No talk. No change. (in the ol' days, speakeasy's were a private way to voice concerns without fear of reprisal)

Consider ATS a 'Speakeasy' of the modern day.

..

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by smirkley]



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
BT, you have fallen into the oh so predictable liberal clap trap of attacking the messenger when you disagree with the information at hand.

Reach out with both hands and get a grip. That might have some basis in reality if you ever came to table without partisan ramblings and parroting these far fetched fecal nuggets that can only be reported in the Right Wing ( Reich Wing?) corners of cyberspace. And for the 100th time...who's a Liberal? Ask the Republicans on the board that were'nt born in the 80's....they'll tell you!

Quoting,
"No compromised sources entered into discussion as 'facts"

Rather than address the real issue which is the democrats action in the senate that is very detrimental to existing and future employment, you would rather attack someone with whom you disagree on politics, never addressing the issue.

You say that pigs can fly, I refute that, yet I'm not addressing the real issue? Again, I've been having above board debates with sensible conservatives for ages on ATS.....and no, they don't try to enter Newsmax as anything but partisan giggles.

Then you find it neccesary to attack personally by implying that I am young and uninformed,

Quoting,
"Here's a thought: try holding off on party politics until you're at least in your mid 20's, maybe even 30."

For your future reference I am old enough to remember when the word "democrat" did'nt make me fear for the safety of my country nor grab for my wallet.

20 is not old enough. There's nothing wrong with admitting your age, that you've never served in the military or that you've only had after school jobs so far....whichever applies. What is wrong is to try & project experience that's just not there.

The poly sci course most popular in the future will be "Obstructionism - how to stop it", why the country was betrayed by neo- democrats"

As for the Forbes story you can see that it was picked up from Reuters - not exactly known as a conservative source.

When an illegal supermajority of 60 is required to get bills passed, deadlock occurs with no republican crossing the aisle.

The issue of overtime is moot when one loses their job because cynical election year games are played with it.
Besides the OT question being important, are not actual jobs even more so. I think the dems just used that as a smokescreen anyway in their effort to make things as bad as they can before the election.

It's called battered wife syndrome, and you're obviously suffering from it. Blocking the appointments of far Right Radicals is not obstructionism, it's common sense. There have been more nominees approved for Bush than any other president at this same time juncture.
I had no issue with the Forbes article, good source. But, it obviously didn't spin as you tried to make it.
"Illegal Super Majority" - Que? You do know that GOP officials voted with Dems on this bill, right?
Read your own source.....Republican leaders stopped things, not Dems.
Who's had the Congressional Majority, the Supremes and the Presidency that's presided over a 2.3 million jobs loss?


Mostly I am surprised and appalled that people are trying to defend this action when it means unequivocal job losses for the very people the democratic party is supposed to represent. Thats hypocracy in its highest form.


Maybe they should rename the party, let me suggest one that is more apt now than its ever been - "hypocratic" party. Kerry is the perfect standard bearer.

Then the spin could be the name means "super" or has a conotation of "medic" but we'll all know the "real" meaning no matter the spin.

To date, there's been no economic stimulus or job growth policies offered by this pResident. There has been a very public support of offshore outsourcing. There has been actual double digit unemployment when you factor in those who've exhausted Unemployment benefits and those who have taken P/T jobs. There has been a tremendous growth, by the millions, on those living below the poverty line in this country, and also at about 50 million, the number of uninsured Americans. With the OT issue, you have further illustration that there will be zero support by this pResident on improving wage labors plight.
And a final note: you may have heard the phrase "Does not suffer fools gladly" it applies here, but it's not personal, really. A thicker skin for someone so obviously enamoured with hardcore partisanship would be expected, but that seems to be lacking here as well.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Well after that nice diatribe about everything under the sun BUT the question at hand. I'll let the viewers of this post wonder who has the thin skin. BTW- 45 years is enough for me to have an opinion.


Maybe I should have used a more credible non biased source such as "Michael Kane"



[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Phoenix]



posted on Mar, 30 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Great actor & the cocney(sic) accent is cool!


You're 45? I never would have believed it ( and I'm still skeptical
!)
I'm in my late 30's.........is 40 really a wall, once scaled, lands one in a junkyard...body wise?



posted on Mar, 30 2004 @ 05:29 PM
link   
BT you love Michael Kane because he espouses what you have already decided and want to hear. If anyone can make a pig fly thats your man!

Your mind after 40 tells your body to do things it no longer wants to do.

How bout a direct comment specifically on the Dems jacking with jobs the way they are without shifting the blame elsewhere or equivocating?



posted on Mar, 30 2004 @ 05:40 PM
link   
There's a very interesting article on the economy and the jobs report that's going to come out on Friday:

www.theaustralian.news.com.au...



posted on Mar, 30 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   
The answer is there, but you're refusing to acknowledge it.
But first, Michael Kane is a British actor...one, that I'm not awre of making any political statements. Are you alluding to Mike Moore ("Bowling for Columbine"?)

The slipping in of riders, some near criminal, by this Republican Senate is well documented. They've erected countless strawmen arguments ( that you have parroted) in substantiating their ideological driven actions. In this case, much like Eli Lily some how got protection against autism litigation because of Mecury in their medicine, in the Homeland Security Bill of all places, the corporate interests of crippling OT pay was glad handed in this bill.
Given the fact that they've done this consistently and have added a dramatic 40% growth of PORK in all bills they pass ( I loved the Hooters one!), it was critical to block this....that's why sensible conservatives from Labor states sided with the Dems on the vote.
I've owned my own practice since '93, but my parents were both Union.....if you think the OT measure is trivial, I can't buy your stated age; wither that or you're a 45 year old Trust Fund -y !



posted on Mar, 30 2004 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Bt, I will agree that legislation should be left in its pure form as presented with only changes made to the substance of the original bill and relevent to its particular substance.
Both parties are guilty of this - I do think its a shame that the democrats will sell out their own constituency in order to make a political point - that sucks if its your job, obviously not yours.

Yes I am veheminatly opposed to the union process as it exists today, it does not represent the common worker. It amounts to a chrony system of spoils that ruins the chances of the average worker.

The problem with my age you seem to have is disbelief that I could listen to all the leftist propaganda for more than 35 years and still hold my ideals? unlike you who see's a boogy man under every rock.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join