What the next 4 years are going to look like

page: 14
51
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional

Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by Hefficide
 




Or are you going to just stay bitter and see it all crash and burn,

I'd like to see it crash and burn. We always need a cycle of destruction for rebirth. Hopefully can be done right this time.


My thoughts exactly! Starred!

I think many are overlooking the real issues, this isnt "bushes" fault, or any single other Americans, it is a generations wide problem. It began under Roosevelt, and has gotten steadily worse, compounded by Dick "I am not a crook" Nixon, as after the gold standard was cancelled, and coupled with the FED, the "infinite growth" model is the problem.

All these corps ran out of "infinite growth" room, thus they stopped paying well, cancelled benefits packages slowly by degrees, then they cut jobs, all in the name of trying to continue on in their obviously failed business model.

If the "too big too fail" comanies had all gone under, as they should have, they would have already been replaced by younger, more economical companies, that still have many ears of "infinite growth" left.

Which is of course, the only honest solution for the current business model.

Company gets large, has alot of money, pays well, runs out of growth room, dies, gets replaced by a younger smaller, less bloated and greed company, world spins on unhindered.

None of them will ever see this of course, as they cannot allow a world without them on top at all times.


When companies get too big you have to break them up. Can't allow anyone to control too much of one thing.or eventually you end up where we are now.




posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I agree both Democrats and Republicans went for the baillouts. Tea Party was against the baillouts, for the record.

But here you are calling Obama and the Democrats right wing again. Why do left wingers keep trying to disassociate from them and yet are responsible for re electing him?


Because they are terrified of the republicans winning, much like the republicans are terrified of the democrats winning. Both parties use this scaremongering tactic to hoarde votes like crazy. You would not believe how many people said "voting for gary johnson is a vote for obama" right here on ATS which is all about denying ignorance.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrnotobc

Originally posted by Thepump

They are not all crooks, that is extreme and ignorant.

There are good and bad people anywhere you go


We're not talking about people. We're talking about politicians. Sure there's one or two honest ones, but not enough to stop the bleeding. An since you mentioned it, i'll just point some of the very few honest politicians are republicans. Don't let the truth make you angry. Learn from it. The majority are corrupt on both sides.


I would argue otherwise...

Some of the very few honest politicians are independents.

Consider your mistake fixed.
edit on 19-11-2012 by Anundeniabletruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

So, my premise was that donating to La raza and all their social responsibility stuff didn't make them a financially feasible operation.: (no reason given)


reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


If that was your premise then why your reference to Obama winning the white house?

The NYT article you are quoting from describes events in 2008 and 2009. The economy was terrible and people stopped drinking expensive coffee. It has nothing to do with who Starbucks donated to or what their politics were.

And now the company is recovered and expanding again which refutes the premise that the Obama administration is bad for their business



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   

FEC releases official popular vote count from 2008 presidential election

August 9th, 2009 · written by Peter Orvetti · 47 Comments

The Federal Election Commission has released its “2008 presidential popular vote summary for all candidates listed on at least one state ballot.” The results:


•Barack Obama (Democrat) 69,498,516 [52.93%]
•John McCain (Republican) 59,948,323 [45.65%]
•Ralph Nader (Independent, Peace and Freedom) 739,034 [0.56%]
•Bob Barr (Libertarian) 523,715 [0.40%]
•Chuck Baldwin (Constitution/Reform/U.S. Taxpayers) 199,750 [0.15%]
•Cynthia McKinney (Green, Independent, Mountain) 161,797 [0.12%]
•Write-In (Miscellaneous) 112,597 [0.09%]
•Alan Keyes (America’s Independent) 47,746 [0.04%]
•Ron Paul (Constitution, Louisiana Taxpayers) 42,426 [0.03%]
•Gloria La Riva (Socialism and Liberation) 6,818 [0.01%]
•Brian Moore (Liberty Union, Socialist) 6,538
•None of These Candidates [Nevada only] 6,267
•Róger Calero (Socialist Workers) 5,151
•Richard Duncan (Independent) 3,905
•James Harris (Socialist Workers) 2,424
•Charles Jay (Boston Tea Party/Independent) 2,422
•John Joseph Polachek (New) 1,149
•Frank Edward McEnulty (Unaffiliated) 829
•Jeffrey J. Wamboldt (Independent) 764
•Thomas Robert Stevens (Objectivist) 755
•Gene C. Amondson (Prohibition) 653
•Jeffrey “Jeff” Boss (Vote Here) 639
•George Phillies (Libertarian) 531
•Ted Weill (Reform) 481
•Jonathan E. Allen (Heartquake ’08) 480
•Bradford Lyttle (U.S. Pacifist) 110The Hill reports on its website that among the “tens of thousands of votes cast for write-in candidates, ultra-fringe parties, and fictitious (or erroneous) contenders” were 43 write-in votes for Vermin Supreme, 19 for Bill Clinton, 11 for Mickey Mouse, nine for Santa Claus, seven for Donald Duck, and five each for “Jesus” and “Joe Plumber”.
Candidates receiving exactly one tallied write-in vote for president were Jose M. Aparicio, Theodis (Ted) Brown Sr., James R. Germalic, Ronald G. Hobbs, Charles Jay, Keith Russell Judd, Lou Kujawski, Curtis Montgomery, Reverend Mere Peace-MsMere, John Leroy Plemons, Michael Skok, David Jon Sponheim, and Shelley Renée Upchurch.


www.independentpoliticalreport.com...

Have I made my point yet? 2008 results...waiting for 2012 official results!



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well according to Romney I'm supposed to get some gifts pretty soon from Obama! This young Black guy is expecting some gifts Obama!! I want a new Obama phone (Please be the iPhone 5), checks in the mail every week, and of course my own pet tiger. Because according to the big wigs in the GOP, I'm lazy and entitled. Because people in urban areas are God-Less gun haters and we just want to take away everyone's freedom with our universal healthcare....I swear, Republicans have been crying like a bunch of babies since the election and it is getting pathetic.We have people killing themselves over the election. If you do not like the direction the country is going in, just leave. Its really that simple. Wait until 2016 when we get a woman or a Latino as President what will happen then!?



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
And another point from the NYT article you posted.

It says Schultz came back to save the company in January of 2008.

That means that whatever problems Starbucks had were happening a year before Obama took office.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
You're stating the negative side of our country. Every country has a negative and a positive side.

And, even though there are a lot of things about American freedoms that annoy me, America, on it's worst day, is better than any other country out there.

There will be ignorance everywhere there are people.

Don't give them the time of day.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Nothing that any of those early politicians said is any more credible than anything said by a current politician and anyone who believes otherwise is just hiding from the truth. They were no less corrupt and had their own self interests in mind just like the majority of them do today.

Thomas Jefferson was a funny man. All men are created equal... well all wealthy white men anyway. Not woman though. Woman are not equal to men, nor are the blacks, or those pesky natives.

I''m guess that many of you believe that Andrew Jackson, a man from my home state who was kind of like myself in some way growing up was a great American too? He sure was mighty nice to them Cherokee natives.

What about "honest" Abe? After all he was such a moral man who cared about freeing them slaves because it was the right thing to do...

People really need to get over that whole "go back to like it was" mentality and realize that it is time to make this a nation that is truly of the people by the people for the people. Because we never really changed, we're still just as corrupt as we have ever been.
edit on 19-11-2012 by Anundeniabletruth because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-11-2012 by Anundeniabletruth because: Some reason or another. . .



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptAmerika
 





You realize that the most prosperous society in history was after Roosevelt's reforms right?


You realize that the manufacturing base of Europe was demolished during WW2 and that someone had to supply goods for the rest of the world right? Prosperity happened in spite of FDR, not because.

Correlation does not imply causation. My father was born in 1942, if I was to use your logic, I could say that

"You realize that the most prosperous society in history was after my father was born right?"

Implying that it was my fathers birth that caused prosperity. Obviously that is a foolish argument to make, no more foolish than the argument you are making though.

Now if you can link FDR's "reforms" (which, BTW, were simply a continuation of Hoover programs) to the actual prosperity other than by saying "this happened before that so it is obviously the reason for that" I'm all ears. Good luck with that, I won't hold my breath.
edit on 19-11-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 





Freedom of speech in terms of financial contributions should a cap


I understand your frustration that someone heroic like Ron Paul cannot win because other people had more money. That is the big business of elections unfortunately. However in an effort to promote the underdog you really seem to be supporting a way to equalize speech, not necessarily encourage free speech. In other words, if someone you want to win doesn't have enough money, you want to stop other people from spending money on their free speech, so the end result is curbing free speech. This is what the liberals tried to do with talk radio and npr, by controlling legislation to force equality by stopping others from their free speech.
edit on 19-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


There is no salary cap in professional sports? I can imagine the new york yankees winning the next 20 world series then. Come on, you can't be that dumb!


And only a twisted person would insist in equating freedom of speech to financial contributions.

Speech is when you open your mouth and speak. Or transferring ideas into text messages. Or dropping a ballot in the voting box.

Equating freedom of speech to financial contributions is a hhuuugggeeee stretch!!! It guarantees republican and democrat domination and corruption.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anundeniabletruth

Originally posted by mrnotobc

Originally posted by Thepump

They are not all crooks, that is extreme and ignorant.

There are good and bad people anywhere you go


We're not talking about people. We're talking about politicians. Sure there's one or two honest ones, but not enough to stop the bleeding. An since you mentioned it, i'll just point some of the very few honest politicians are republicans. Don't let the truth make you angry. Learn from it. The majority are corrupt on both sides.


I would argue otherwise...

Some of the very few honest politicians are independents.

Consider your mistake fixed.
edit on 19-11-2012 by Anundeniabletruth because: (no reason given)


Fine, I stand corrected. But I'm still right, we're still talking about very few. Not rearly enough to change anything.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
What the next 4 years are going to look like in a nutshell is exactly what the last 4 years have looked like

4 more years of being told I hate poor people
4 more years of being told I hate women
4 more years of being told I hate African Americans
4 more years of being told I hate Hispanics
4 more years of being told I hate Gays
4 more years of being told I hate the middle class
4 more years of being told how evil corporations are
4 more years of being told how evil banks are
4 more years of the mass media ignoring everything inherently wrong with the current administration
4 more years of how the GOP is obstructionist.
4 more years of tax the rich
4 more years of the liberal superiority complex from a party that claims everyone is "equal"
4 more years of "like how totally awesome Obama and the Democrats are".
4 more years of Blame Bush which makes Bush the longest serving Potus in US history.

The United states of ignorance is what the country is
The united states of dysfunction is also what this country is.

Blah blah Blah

In the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin:

We are all born ignorant, but one really must work hard to remain stupid.
edit on 18-11-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


4 more years of listening to people whine...

Apparently...

(Some things will never change no matter who is in charge.)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 
If you don't agree with the progressive socialist running the country now you will, they don't debate facts they just ridicule people that don't agree with them.
This is what you get from people that hate and anger is a part of there everyday life to the people that diagree with them and have facts to back up what they say, they call everyone liers first and start in on your list after that.
There is no compromise, its there way or you are all the things on your list as I'm sure you have found out answering the ridacule and hate you have no doubt experienced here on your thread.

Good luck with this and the next four years.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I think you are right. We are way to involved in the effort to make one, who has opinions opposite to ours, two dimensional having no possible merit.

Well since both views do exist, along with their proponents, it behooves us to, if not to accept, at least allow for the existence, of that opinion.

When one affirms the right for another to be, then the necessity of compromise becomes more clear. Unfortunately name calling seems more typical of human behavior. That's why I don't hold out much hope.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Allenb83

You sound like a socialist bleeding heart liberal when you say you need to compromise your individual values for what's best for this country...


The propaganda has really gotten that entrenched? That the word "compromise" is now synonymous with "social bleeding heart liberal"???? Now it's weakness for a person to put aside their own selfishness for the good of the group?

Wow. This country may be more lost than I previously thought.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
None of the things you outlined are going to matter soon. We have thrown the equilibrium of the planet off so badly its going to readjust inevitably, and that readjustment is going to be brutally painful for us. We have poisoned the air and the water and our food, and have lost almost 50 percent of the arctic icecap. Regardless of what you think, climate change is REAL and its happening NOW. Pretty soon its going to start to significantly affect agriculture, and thats when things will get really bad. By then, most people will be so preoccupied with staying alive none of the things you outlined will be even remotely relevant. The consensus is that we have a window of 10 years to fix this. And everyone knows thats not going to happen, because the God of this world, MONEY, wont let it. So dont sweat it too much. Love your kids and try to live a decent life in the time we have left.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aisling
reply to post by Americanist
 


Thanks Americanist. What will coconut oil do? How much oil would I dilute to how much water? I appreciate the tip.


You don't have to dilute it. I don't know why he is suggesting to mix oil and water, but it's just easier to grab a kitchen spoon and dig in but don't do more than half a teaspoon or you will spend the afternoon in the bathroom. Coconut oil generally stays solid if you keep in a cool place. It will become liquid if it is in a warm place. Yes it's a good supplement according to recent research and good for your immune system.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Battleline
reply to post by neo96
 
If you don't agree with the progressive socialist running the country now you will, they don't debate facts they just ridicule people that don't agree with them.
This is what you get from people that hate and anger is a part of there everyday life to the people that diagree with them and have facts to back up what they say, they call everyone liers first and start in on your list after that.
There is no compromise, its there way or you are all the things on your list as I'm sure you have found out answering the ridacule and hate you have no doubt experienced here on your thread.

Good luck with this and the next four years.



This is an incredibly ironic post. Thanks for the vitriol for those whom you disagree with.

CJ



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 


Well yes, really it was only referring to people of voting age.





new topics
top topics
active topics
 
51
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum