Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by nenothtu
On this issue, I am not partisan, and never claimed I was.
Choosing sides, "democrat vs. republican", is the very definition of partisan - it means to toe the party line. If the shoe fits...
While you say "forget being partisan", you clearly are extremely partisan. Is there any issue you agree with the liberal side?
Okay, I'll bite. which "party" am I being "partisan" in favor of? I'll need something out of your evidence room to prove your point on that one, not
just another "well you ARE!".
Yes, I often find myself agreeing with "liberals". It's a very uncomfortable place to be, and I have several posts scattered across ATS remarking on
the discomfort I have when I find myself in that position.
Sure I remember Carter, most messed up thing he did was repeal laws against usury, which should be reinstated, but neither side dares to say such a
thing. Most likely the tea baggers would throw the biggest hissy fit.
You think that was the worst thing he did? Something that no one but you even remembers?
In four years of absolute blunders, I'm not sure the man ever did anything at all right! On the positive side, he was probably the best president
Panama EVER had! I'm not even sure which "usury laws" you're referring to. Interest has been charged on loans ever since I can remember, and that's
long before the Carter years, It certainly never made the news at the time, but there was so much going on, and none of it good, that it must have
slipped through the cracks.
Carter inherited stag inflation and rampant crime from the Nixon Ford years.
Uh... yeah... of COURSE he did...
Evidently, the mantra is "democrats only 'inherit' problems, so they don't have to fix anything". I lived
through those years. The Carter economy was the worst I'd ever seen up until the end of the Bush years. Neither Nixon nor Ford could even hold a
candle to Carter for sheer ineptitude, nor anyone since - until Bush II and Obama.
Do you remember tricky Dicky?
Yup, i remember him. Kept his campaign promise to extract all the troops from Vietnam, thus allowing Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos ALL to fall to the
communists. Then, to add insult to injury, he got his dumb ass busted playing the dirty tricks game in matters of campaign intelligence gathering on
his opposition. I've got no great love for the man. Why do you ask? How does he relate at all to the discussion at hand?
A great many people from his corrupt admin snuck back into power under Reagan, and the Reagan years were far worse for working people in the U.S. than
WHICH "working people"? I was "working people" during both those times, and Carter damn near killed us all! If Reagan hadn't got Carter's mess
straightened out, there probably wouldn't even BE an America now. All the working people I know were staggering pretty hard under Carter's inflation
rates and such. His mishandling of everything from economic matters to foreign policy is what EARNED him the distinctive title of "worst chief
executive ever"... until now, that is...
In addition to using the war on drugs to strip us of our rights, Reagan also opened the flood gate to illegal immigration. Are you aware of any of
The "War on Drugs" has been going on forever. Reagan only mis-named it. I guess you don't recall the debacle about Paraquat spraying in Mexico under
Carter? Johnson and Nixon both did some pretty horrendous rights-abrogating things under the guise of "protecting" dopers from themselves, and we ALL
suffered for it, and do to this day. To try to lay the whole thing on Reagan, just because he was a republican, is disingenuous at best.
Never said that Obama inherited the job, only that he inherited the mess created by the GW Admin under the con of the free market.
Sure. He didn't deserve the job, then, if he wasn't bright enough to know that the economic woes came along with it. "Inherited" my ass, he begged for
them. Hasn't done a damn thing to fix 'em, either - only made it worse. Maybe, since he's hard after raising taxes, he can assess an "inheritance" tax
You know, right in the beginning, the "inheritance" argument might work, but after a couple of years of doing nothing to fix the problems, and in fact
only exacerbating them, that whiny mantra gets thin. He OWNS this mess. Whether he "inherited" it or bought it out right is immaterial - he still OWNS
it, and refuses to FIX it.
Reagan "inherited" double digit inflation from Carter - but he didn't just sit on it, he fixed it.
When are you going to wake up to the reality that attempts to create a free market are what created this mess in the first place, and that the repubs
in the House only want to continue the same policies.
I dunno. Maybe. I've not got a firm handle yet on just what this nebulous thing is that they are now applying the label "free market" to. A "free
market" is what built America - up until it started declining. Somehow, I get the impression that what they now refer to as a "free market" is
anything BUT a liberty-based economic system. It worked for years... until some one, some where, apparently has tried to re-define it to mean
something other than what it says.
They aren't out to cut corporate welfare, corporations put them in office, they are bought and paid for.
Whoa there big fella! The democrats don't get a pass on that! Can't just leave the republicans holding the bag there! That applies equally to ALL
sides of this equation! Better go look up the facts behind the rhetoric of campaign contributions before you claim it's only the republicans who are
bought and paid for. Obama's gift of the money of ALL of us to the insurance corporations is but one example that gives the lie to that whole premise.
His continuation of the Bush bail-outs is another example, and his insistence in raising the debt ceiling to pay bankers interest on debts we
shouldn't have is yet another.
Nope, it ain't ALL republicans, as much as the politically partisan WISH it was!
The goal of the tea baggers is to cut the budget of the exec admin whose job it is to round up the crooks and hold them responsible for their crimes.
I dunno. I'd like to trim the whole damn thing back myself - every facet of government. I CERTAINLY take exception to things like the recent arming of
Mexican drug Cartels by the US government. Seems to me like if they're going to exist at this size, they ought to find something productive to do to
make a showing for their paychecks. I'd be every bit as happy as I am right now if Bush's "Homeland Security", the entire BATFE, most of the IRS, and
several other useless federal eaters just suddenly ceased to exist, and others got severely pruned back to manageable levels. I wonder how far FIRING
large chunks of useless eaters in the federal government would go towards freeing up money for useful purposes? I think it would be worth finding out.
Couldn't hurt, as a minimum.
You support the people trying to protect the crooks who destroyed our economy.
Huh? no, just.... no. I'm arguing with you, ain't I? You are trying to protect Obama, who is hard after finishing us off, yet oddly I'm not supporting
you in that effort.
When are you going to stop drinking the kool-aid?
Coming from you, that's hilarious!
The funniest part is that you seem not to understand why
edit on 2011/7/21 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)