Attention Right Wing Bashers

page: 15
48
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by DirectDemocracy
 


Agree 100%, actually.

Star for you.




posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
liars deserve no respect lies lies lies lies lies and more lies, what i saw



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
UCLA study on FDR and the Depression


Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.



"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."



newsroom.ucla.edu...



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


I think most men and a woman want a job. They want to work and make a honest days pay. That is all that I want. I do not want handouts. I do not want freebies. Just a damn job. And neither of the two candidates are mentioning anything about helping me get one.

It is CRUCIAL for the people to work and have jobs. Otherwise they sit around stewing planning revolutions to tar and feather the rich corporations and bankers robbing them. Then once the bankers and corporations are gone, the celebrity politicians will not have any more dosh coming into their coffers.

It is like a financial ecosystem. We are the bees, the worker bees. We have a disease called greed wiping us out. If the workers go then the bankers do not get pollinated and if the bankers go the politicians do not get to breath the oxygen that the bankers manufacture. It is all connected



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   


If either politician could propose a New Deal like solution to our economy it would be beneficial. We need to update the nations internet infrastructure


I disagree emphatically the new deal was a joke pay people to dig ditches and then fill them back in bascially.

Spend billions of dollars that only benefit specialized jobs and then what?

If people are serious about a solution to the economy the ideal solution is to promote small business,incentives,get off their backs,obamacare waivers and let them do what they do.

Over 65% of all jobs in this country are created by small business the broadest brush of "stimulus" that will impact the most people.

"internet infrastructure" only benifits. union employees to build the lines,Foreign companies in China to build and deliver the technology.

Small business is your local mom and pops,next door neighbors etc not special interests.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 



But if there's anything more unpredictable than the direction of the market, it's the effects of government tinkering with economic policy. And even today, economists and historians still vigorously debate not only whether or not the New Deal helped take the country out of the Depression but if it actually made things worse.
A split

Just how divided are experts? In 1995, economist Robert Whaples of Wake Forest University published a survey of academic economists that asked them if they agreed with the statement, "Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression." Fifty-one percent disagreed, and 49 percent agreed. Whaples today says that the New Deal remains a thorny issue for economists because it's so difficult to measure the effects it had on the country. "You need a credible model of the economy, and not everyone is going to agree on what that model should be," he says.

Source

A hotly contested issue, IMO more along partisan lines as anything else. The bottom line, however, is that nobody can truly say if the New Deal worked as well as other things might have, or not, because we have no alternate history to compare things with. Judging it is basically Monday morning quarterbacking. It worked. Would other things have worked better? Maybe, maybe not. What is fact is that the New Deal gave rise to the Golden age of America and the most peaceful and prosperous decade in American history.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 





I don't think hes a socialist, per say.


My answer to this is that he's a Left hegelian but tied indisputably into the NWO. He even said he believed people wanted a stake in "the kind of World Order" he believes in. To understand left and right hegelian process, we have to understand it as two sides of the same coin. They have different faces but belong to the same piece of metal.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


One does have to take into account the activites of the Federal Reserve after the Fed res Act of 1913 was put in place and that the crash of 29 happened just a few years after. Wasn't the Fed supposed to stop crashes like that happening? Create the crisis and supply the solution....Problem/Reaction/Solution and that is the activity of hegelian dialectic....

Thanks for the civil discussion.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DirectDemocracy
I am still trying to figure out what makes a Republican and what makes a Democrat?

Is it gun rights? Apparently not because there are pro gun rights liberals and anti-gun conservatives.

Is it abortion? Well it can't be because there are Pro Life Liberals and Pro Choice Conservatives.

Is it the size of the government? NOT AT ALL! They both LOVE to spend those government taxes.

Is it the economy? Nope. Both sides claim the other is responsible for unemployment, yet neither side has a solution to unemployment.

So just what the hell IS the difference between a republican and a democrat? I have no clue. I only see differences between the two men running for POTUS.

A crooked mob lawyer from Chicago, and a Corporate Axe man who got rich stealing pensions and sending jobs overseas.

I can't bash the Right Wingers when I have no freaking clue what a right winger even is.

I can say I like Obama more than Romney, but these are just men. Just men. The party they represent is what matters.

The people who gave them hundreds of millions of dollars for their campaign in exchange for promises is what matters. I will not bother to register to vote yet again. This will be Election number 5 that I have not bothered to register to vote for. Kind of sucks paying taxes when I have no representation though




Now that is a fair and useful question. Certainly the definitions have changed just in the past few decades, especially on the "Republican" side, but also on the Democratic" side. Nixon would be considered a big time liberal by modern standards. He opened the U.S. to China, then considered a major enemy (sort of like the current pres making a State visit to Iran). He expanded the social safety net. He shut down the Vietnam war.




* Saved America’s environment by creating the Environmental Protection Agency and Clean Air Act while approving the most sweeping environmental legislation in history.
* Simultaneously reformed welfare and brought in serious new civil-rights laws and agencies for minorities, women, the handicapped and children.
* Proclaimed the first official U.S. Earth Day/Earth Week in 1971. * Totally reformed the government’s relationship with Native Americans, bringing new self-determination and civil rights to U.S. tribes while saving such Indian natural wonders as Pyramid Lake — the tribe even renamed its capital “Nixon.”
* Was even described as “the Abraham Lincoln of the Indian people.”
* Loved those Chinese communists.
* Spent more on social programs than defense!

Source

At the same time, Obama could be rationally argued to be far right of Nixon:

- He is wielding American power more aggressively than even Bush with drones attacks being expanded to many sovereign nations
- Massive expansion of the Patriot Act and signing of the NDAA
- Establishing a national healthcare plan that is actually a national health insurance plan using private insurers vs. a single payer government system. The "mandate" concept was born from the ultra conservative Heritage Foundation
- (Contrary to Right wing freakouts) He has done nor proposed anything in the way of gun control
- He put both Medicare and Social Security on the table for aggressive changes, but the Right shot it down because the deal might have included a tax increase, even at 10:1 cuts:tax increases (STUPID move on the Right....shoot yourself in the foot, making the perfect the enemy of the good, etc.). No Progressive would EVER have put that on the table with such a disparate ratio

Also, no rational person will say the Republicans have not trended strongly into a science-denying, religiously-dominated party, with the intellectual side of the party completely destroyed.

Indeed, what IS a Dem or a Rep anymore? Historians are pretty much unanimous that both parties have shifted far to the right. I would personally add that BOTH modern parties have MASSIVELY eroded civil liberties and entirely are beholden to the major corporations. Are government DOES NOT represent the People -- in no way, shape or form -- they represent the Corporation.

- In the U.S. a large plurality of the electorate supports raising taxes on the rich. The Right ignore the people.
- The vast majority of the country wants out of Afghanistan, both the Right and the current Dems (they are not the left) continue to ignore the will of the people.
- A huge majority want the financial elite help accountable, both parties are in lockstep to prevent that.

The reasons why the above is happening is because the corporations get what they demand. Government knows the People can and will do nothing.
edit on 1-9-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
When will people understand? Republican=Democrat, Right Wing=Left Wing.

You cannot run this Empire with fair elections and parties. And yes, how does it feel to be part of Rome 2.0, brown baby killer edition?

Let's see here, we have a war every 20 years, apart from the ones that we don't go through congress, or those events where we test our new toys. (Libya south america, Africa, you name it, were there!)

Wiped out over 90% of the Native American population, 5 million dead Vietnamese civilians, and 1.5 million Iraqi's in counting.

And those are the wars that were televised! Don't forget about the thousands slaughtered in South America, Indonesia, and Africa!

Then you see and hear this crap about "I'm proud to be American". You know, with NDAA and NDRP now, this feels exactly like star wars episode 2. The Supreme Chancellor AKA (Romney=Obama) will diminish the Senate and the House, and bring Peace to the Galaxy.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
NO one really cares about any of us, don't get fooled!!!



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by neo96
 


The Leftists next week will swoon over the oratory skills emitting from the pie-holes of the idiots speaking of everything but;
the economy, unemployment, GDP, consumer confidence, the war in Afghanistan, Obama's kill-list, raising taxes, cost of food increases, cost of gas increases, Hurricane Issac, drones in AMerican skies, UN tax decrees, ACA, ad nauseum.


Of these:

1) The war in Afganistan is the fault of the GOP and all the Americans who got upset when 9/11 happened. Had you guys been paying attention and not felt bad about it, you wouldn't have that war now. At this point, its a mess and its hard to pull out of. That being said, I'm not sure our continued presence there is helpful.

2) The biggest problem with this is the whole "killing American citizens without a trial via air strike" thing. That being said, I can understand why sometimes its necessary, but it is still questionable.

3) Raising taxes? Really? The US has a very low tax rate, and raising taxes isn't really going to hurt anything. Especially raising taxes on the wealthy. What really needs to be done, though, is tax reform - remove all these exceptions. Personal income tax should be purely by income, not by source, and it should be pretty absolute - maybe a tax deduction for a single child, and that's it. Make it simpler, make it easy, and hike taxes on people who make money off of not working - there's no reason that capital gains should be taxed differently from normal income, as in reality they do LESS to contribute to the economy.

4) The cost of food going up is not Obama's responsibility. Part of the problem is the fact that people in Iowa want government handouts for growing corn for ethanol, and killing those subsidies will help slightly... but not overly so. The real cause is mostly the fact that oil is going up in price, and that's because there is less of it (and it is more difficult to extract) every year, though removing oil subsidies would help very slightly as well.

5) The price of oil is entirely out of Obama's hands. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to lower the price of oil that is an even remotely rational thing to do. Drive an electric car if it bothers you. Can't afford one? Too bad.

6) Hurricane Isaac is more the fault of everyone who refuses to do anything about global warming, and those who refuse to not rebuild New Orleans and similar areas, than anything else. Even then, it is difficult to attribute single weather conditions to anything. Really, I don't see what's complain-worthy there. Hurricanes hit every year.

7) Drones are useful for a wide variety of purposes and will be in American skies no matter what. Whining about the progess of technology is pointless. Yes, they allow more observation of everything. But yes, that is inevitable. Besides, we have CCTV cameras everywhere anyway, not to mention satellites; drones will make no negative difference on our privacy.

8) The UN can say whatever it wants, but it is up to the member nations to listen or not listen. That is part of why the UN is pretty useless; it has little enforcement capability.

9) I have no idea which ACA you're referring to there.

Seriously, though, the Republicans are inarguably the "bad guys" at this point. They are against freedom of religion, they are against employers having to pay fair wages, they are free market fundamentalists, they are against abortion and contraception, they are against freedom of speech against the government (or more precisely, against them), they are against government openness...

The real problem is that people assume that if the Republicans are the "bad guys", the Democrats must be the "good guys". They are just everyone else. Some of them are good, some of them are bad. But the Republicans are pretty much uniformly bad news, either outright evil or deeply incompetent or crazy.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I think it would be wise to fix our infrastructure.
We are rated a D- as a Nation, Neo.

Now, having a President to implement it, without using the fixings, as a reason to Unionize workers, and abuse the fix, as a reelection gimmick? Good luck with that.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


In terms of the New Deal, I think it was a good idea for it's time and as far as they were allowed to take it. They wanted to go further then, but couldn't. It went about the right distance for safety net vs. socialism as a fundamental change to the way our system worked.

After all, the United States had just come through a Great Depression...or still clawing out from it...and folks had just seen what 20% + Unemployment with Soup Kitchens looked like in their own neighborhoods and with no food stamps or TANF programs to help bridge an emergency gap for people falling hard.

Of course, the problem is that I don't see where the social program side of the New Deal was meant to become a system so large, it literally consumed our entire budget and way of life..as it's coming to do. Over half the nation, literally by any physical head count, now takes benefits of some sort and those working simply don't produce enough to keep a balance now, let alone see the ratio tip further.

So.... New Deal = Great idea on paper..and badly needed.
New Deal = Catastrophe in slow motion for the long term where control or moving back has simply never even been allowed into the discussion with programs capable of destroying everything we have as a nation and well on their way to doing that now.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by finitedualities
The fact that people still think there's a difference between the two is hilarious. Maybe lurk around here some more, or better yet, push your head even further into the sand, lmao.


You are CORRECT! Everyone is fighting over which end of the turd tastes best...oh no its the GOP end....no, no its the Democratic end that tastes best. A turd is a turd is a turd.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke

The DNC convention is up and coming and I want to see those critics hold their own party to the same standards they set for the Republicans This week.


1. Anyone right wing unless fascist would not be rooting for the Republican party. It's a disgrace you lumped all right wing people together claiming they are all republicans.

2. Pretty sure 99% of left wing people on ATS are not democrats, as the democratic party is right wing itself.






Yup, much like the conservatives and liberals in Canada, but I only voted NDP when I did vote. I like Norways system best.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Am I to understand that you are proud of your party?
Maybe you support Romney?
Are you threatened by the taxing of people making over 250k per year?
Are you aware that republicans have a majority in the house?
Are you aware of the gridlock caused by your party?
Are YOU unbiased?

Sounds to me like you are just as desperate as the rest of your RNC brethren. You have no party left. The remnant of a party is so divided that they could not make one decision as a group. They obviously do not represent the voters as was demonstrated by passing new rules as needed to match their agenda.

Republicans have no representation. The republican party is now a dictatorship just as it would be if Romney were elected.

Fortunately for all sane people Romney is a douche-bag and EVERYONE knows it. The only support he has comes from white Christians who vote republican because God wants them to. They don't like Romney, they just hate Democrats more.

Obama will be re-elected because your party has gone insane. They could have allowed delegates to vote for their candidate fairly, but they chose to fix ballots and cheat every way imaginable instead. Republican leadership is a disgrace to America. The entire world is now aware of just how insane our leaders have become.

The only thing this party has to offer is more war. I support every man to a fair fight. If Syria has wronged YOU I support YOU TO FIGHT THEM on your own. I support giving you a gun and letting you slay your enemy. If you want their oil go take it. It is certainly not about atrocities or weapons of mass destruction. We never lifted a finger when a million Africans were slain by rival gangs.

As to the last 4 years please give my warm regards to your idiot ruler Bush who placed us in this mess. Bush and Cheney made billions from the wars they started. We are still recovering from the massive debt and military buildup from them. It always amazes me how you conveniently forget WHY we are in this mess and WHO is responsible. If you are going to hold others to a high standard maybe you should lower yourself from your soapbox and take credit for your own failings?

That will never happen because your party is full of those who will never apologize for their actions right or wrong. They are a proud bunch. Insane, but proud. Now they have humiliated themselves on the world stage and everyone around the world can see just how unstable the party is as well as their candidate for President.

The DNC convention does not even matter at this point. There does not even need to be a Democratic party. Romney was a laughing stock the last 2 times he ran so why is he all of a sudden the golden boy? Because Ron Paul is the opposite of the party he represents and they would lose all of their power if they allowed him to be elected. The government would go through a makeover that would unseat all the power brokers and warmongers causing worldwide destruction. Of course good Republicans could never allow that to happen.

Your party is a useless waste of time. Yell and scream all you like. Throw a temper tantrum. Either way you are part of a dinosaur who's time has passed. More than half of your own party is against you and 60% of America who is not part of your party is against you. That is about 80% AGAINST YOU. Heil Bush! Heil RNC! Abortion! Faggots! What else have you got?

Your rhetoric is outdated and useless. The world will move on without you dinosaurs. Enjoy your last hoorah.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Heff, I like most of what you say, but the New Deal did not bring us out of the depression. What did, was our forced entry into WWll. that unleashed a massive manufacturing boom and the return of "the greatest generation" that saw opportunities and used their entrepreneurial skills to better themselves. That generation lived through the Depression, and suffered the hardships. That experience left it's mark on them and the baby boomers, who for the most part were determined to be self reliant, frugal and willing to sacrifice their time and money for a better life for their children.

Today, adventurous wars, exported manufacturing, and a spoiled "me first", instant gratification, government dependent, generation have no sense of history or finances. If they did they would understand what trap is being set by the left and it's dependency ideology.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I do tend to side with the left on most issues, but there are some conservative issues I can agree with. The problem I have with the 2 party system, is both prevent their party members to decent from their parties political platform. Political issues that effect different income classes in this country are not always black or white.

The two party system causes nothing but division.

We don't have a level playing field when an incumbent runs against an unknown candidate. The political packs and campaign chests that incumbents have at their disposal is like stacking a deck. Serving the public, shouldn't be a life long career. Government officials shouldn't be attracted by high salaries and perks.

I can understand how some lobbying can be good for the people, but the way the current system is set up, the people are at a greater disadvantage when compared to the large sum of money of support from corporations and insurance companies. The system is simply not a level playing field.

When money can decide an election over truth, there's a problem with the system. Politicians are getting away with selling a bag of slanted truths to the public. There should be an impartial committee set-up to analyze political ads for truth before they're placed in the media.

I'm an independent and I have become disingenuous to the entire system. Unless your rich or have been born with a silver spoon in your mouth, the chances of an average middle class citizen running for presidency is next to zero.

The way the republican party silenced Ron Paul's delegates was simply appalling. How can anyone trust a system that goes out of the way to suppress a persons right to free speech. If they can do that, what else are they capable of doing?



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by nightstalker46
 


I can agree with what you are saying - to a degree. It's theory, and it's sound theory. But still theory. If Coolidge had been able to tax more, as he wanted, we might not have crashed as we did. Then again, they had the same problem we have today - a crooked banking system and a crooked stock / Wall Street. So who knows?

In the realm of "what if" there are many choices. As you said, WWII pulled us up. Wars historically do that for economies. From my POV, this time around, the "trickle down" aspects of this process have failed. The folks at the top clogged the drain up so that only drops trickle now. I do think that war is making a LOT of money, and has for the past decade - but only a anointed few are seeing the profits.

I admire FDR because he knew how to handle these things. When he decided to take Wall Street to task - he tapped the dirtiest guy on Wall Street to do the housecleaning.. and Joe Kennedy did it quite well. Arguments about socialism can be made - and not all of the new deal programs were good things. But the WPA put a lot of people back to work - and some things got worked out pretty well.

Today, we have the benefit of hindsight. Rather than totally accepting or totally rejecting the New Deal, in a wholesale manner - we have the ability to analyze it, improve it, strip away what didn't work, and reproduce what did. We can make a much better "Newer Deal" if we choose to,

~Heff





new topics
top topics
 
48
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join