~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 1) I don't call people ignorant for not agreeing with me... I call them ignorant because they aren't acknowledging all the possibilities, which is indeed ignorant. Read my above post. I'm not even pro-Bush. 2) Yes I know Bush has played a part in our current state - but no, he isn't to blame for every little thing that's gone wrong. He turned into peoples' scape goat once he made the call to invade Iraq. 3) I know it's not suddenly that people don't like Bush... I used "all the sudden" not as a time stamp but as a figure of speech to accentuate people's quick change of mind about going to war. 4) Regarding what Bush has done to help Social Security, Healthcare, Education, etc.: See federal spending breakdown below. Notice how most of those things you mentioned are on par with military/defense spending. The money was there - it's not Bush's fault nobody knew how to use it. Bush is not an expert in any of the fields you listed... the best he can do is allocate spending for the so-called experts to use. 5) Regarding the military: There was no draft. It's never good to go to war, but everyone in Iraq volunteered to fight, and if some of them don't believe in the war, why are they volunteering to be there? (Yes I realize other things come into play) 6) Surplus? Are you mad? Our country has been in the red for a-lot longer than 8 years. Our government has spent more money than they make EVERY YEAR SINCE 1969. Do you seriously want to get into this with me? Despite your opinions of me, I'm pretty well educated on politics and a-lot of what you brought up is unjustified garbage. NO, you are calling people ignorant because you "claim" they aren't acknowledging all the possibilities"? How do you know what people have acknowledged and then decided upon? You are the ignorant one. Bush doesn't need to be an Expert in every specialty...but it most certainly was HIS JOB to make this country better, and he did a miserable job of it, PERIOD! He needed to be an expert in making sure things were done, and done well. Read what most Americans think about him. I have posted links since last summer, and one had his "record" on every important issue...and it compared him to the past Presidents, and his numbers ranked the worst in all of them. But most people know this. It's not just about "what went wrong" it's about what did he do right? NOT MUCH, if anything...you tell me what improved in this country (that makes an impact on the average American). PLEASE, do not use his war on terror in your example, because i don't believe our country or the world is any safer...so use any other example. Surplus? Go back to how Clinton left the budget... I don't seriously want to get into anything with you because your opinions sound stupid to me...i am educated too, and i know Bush did nothing to improve the state of Healthcare in his EIGHT long years. That would have been an attainable goal. But it wasn't important, nothing much was. I have a feeling you are too young to have felt the impact of the Bush years on your life. edit for typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 It will always be that way. Think about it, if you are in debt and say do some kind of refinance to eliminate revolving debt, they loan you money at a higher interest rate because you have so much debt thus all you are doing is streaching out the time it takes to pay off the debt, you have lower payments but it costs you more in the end. It's basically like going to a casino the deck is always going to be in the favor of the house. So if you gave me that loan, i would only pay a couple percentage points, and avoid all that mess? lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 That is the truth. The sad truth... but it would be nice to have a President change that for the "average" person. But since Bush just made them richer with his bailout...we are that much poorer. First and foremost, put down the crayons for a second. A lot of people are just assuming the bailout helped the rich and hurt the poor because it increased the upper-insured limit to 100k at banks. How is this bad? In all probability, the middle class has less than $100k to put in the bank anyways, so who cares if the upper-insured limit is increased? Although it doesn't immediately (notice I said immediately - I'll be back to this later) help the middle class, it doesn't hurt them either! Its a good strategy because the people who do have that kind of money to stash will likely stash more of it... this effectively bails out some of the banks who were in a crisis - this neither hurt nor helped the middle class, and it doesn't necessarily help the upper class so much as it helps the banks. The last thing the economy needs is for the middle class, the largest group of consumers, to stash away their money and stop consuming - that would make this exactly like what happened in 1929! The upper class will spend no matter what, because they can afford to bank a lot and spend large amounts simultaneously - with the larger insured ceiling, they can trust more of their money with the banks and keep them from collapsing, effectively controlling interest rates to save the middle and lower classes. When the banks don't collapse, interest rates don't go out of control, effectively helping - you guessed it - middle class people that are in the middle of mortgages or loans. This is just 1 part of it, but I can go on if you want. Have you even looked into what you posted, or did you just post it because of someone else? Stay on the ball man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 As the leader of a country, sometimes you need to step up and make the tough choices. You just cannot afford to wait around and play good guy all day long when there's even the slightest possibility for something really bad happening. He took action instead of waiting for the what might have been. I just wish somebody could respect that. What if it was you? If it came down to even the slightest possibility of your country being attacked if you didn't take action, wouldn't you take action? I mean the guy is a threat regardless, rather it be a harmful dictator or a possible terrorist. I'd rather risk the lives of our brave soldiers to remove those possibilities than risk the lives of whole cities of innocent people because you were too late. Isn't that the reason we have the military in the first place? Its a tough decision I know, but no one in their right mind would do it any different than he did if it came down to it. So then you are saying we should be getting ready to fight Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, and maybe Mexico , who could be a real threat with the crime cartel and the corruption in their law enforcement (something to think about), just across our borders and selling us drugs everyday...huh... would be nice if all potential dictators could be abolished before they have a chance to harm anyone, same goes for rapists and murderers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Ugh, never mind. You say you get it, but you don't. Whatever, it doesn't matter. It's done now, we've got a new president, hopefully he'll do a better job. I'm tired of arguing with you and I know it isn't going to go anywhere, so good night. I FULLY UNDERSTAND YOUR P.O.V... What I don't understand is why you think eliminating the very high potential for the deaths of millions while helping to liberate a country is less important than chasing around someone who has the potential to kill only thousands. Can you please elaborate on this? Your take on how it should have gone would have been REACTIVE path, which is not even close to being ideal when you're running a fu[king country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 First and foremost, put down the crayons for a second. A lot of people are just assuming the bailout helped the rich and hurt the poor because it increased the upper-insured limit to 100k at banks. How is this bad? In all probability, the middle class has less than $100k to put in the bank anyways, so who cares if the upper-insured limit is increased? Although it doesn't immediately (notice I said immediately - I'll be back to this later) help the middle class, it doesn't hurt them either! Its a good strategy because the people who do have that kind of money to stash will likely stash more of it... this effectively bails out some of the banks who were in a crisis - this neither hurt nor helped the middle class, and it doesn't necessarily help the upper class so much as it helps the banks. The last thing the economy needs is for the middle class, the largest group of consumers, to stash away their money and stop consuming - that would make this exactly like what happened in 1929! The upper class will spend no matter what, because they can afford to bank a lot and spend large amounts simultaneously - with the larger insured ceiling, they can trust more of their money with the banks and keep them from collapsing, effectively controlling interest rates to save the middle and lower classes. When the banks don't collapse, interest rates don't go out of control, effectively helping - you guessed it - middle class people that are in the middle of mortgages or loans. This is just 1 part of it, but I can go on if you want. Have you even looked into what you posted, or did you just post it because of someone else? Stay on the ball man. I will admit, i can't paraphrase this any better... and your condescending attitude towards me and Mona didn't go unnoticed. I will admit, i play with crayons since i do color with my 4 year old sometimes. I am guessing you are currently enrolled in an Economics 101 course or something along those lines. Good luck and i hope when you graduate, there will be a job available for you. I do believe that the Bush bailout should have been named the Bush handout to the richest of the rich who f*ed up our country, but deserve billions more to try again...give me a break, docron. They aren't lending this money because hey, they don't have any legal obligation to. They are lining their mattresses and their retirement first off.... And just to make you happy, i read this link twice, so i know what it says. WARNING: Ranting about our impotent government bailout follows February 06, 2009 11:17 AM EST Our bloated government. All these millions and all these billions being thrown around like they are chump change by our elected officials. One trillion dollars = $1,000,000,000,000.00 That's a one followed by twelve zeroes. Holy crap! When the Bush administration tossed $700,000,000.00 at the banks and wall street it happened so farging fast that we blinked and it was passed by the congress. Everyone put their heads in the sand and the banks went on a spending spree and bought failing banks and entertained themselves by taking expensive junkets to celebrate their good fortune... while friends of mine lost their jobs! When America got interested- and by America I mean the taxpayers and everyday folks- as to where the money went everyone involved sort of shrugged their shoulders and said, "uhhh... I dunno?" Our politicians took this as an acceptable answer. Funny put our elected officials never asked the question where did the money go? How was it used? They only asked... would you like some more? Now that the unaccounted for billions has evaporated into the pockets of the greedy bastard wall streeters--- our leaders- the so-called "experts" want more mollah to get America going again. Now-- more of my friends and family members are losing their jobs and lining up for unemployment. The fat cats still enjoy their million dollar salaries, take their million dollar vacations and sit in their million dollar homes giving the rest of America the finger. How about a little oversight on were this money goes? Where are the checks and balances we are supposed to have in our government? Sleeping in bed with the corporations, lobbyists and special interests? It sucks that corruption at all levels of government has become as accepted in America- just as it has been accepted in third world countries run by dictators. America needs a wake up call. Over the last half century we've made bargains with the devil regarding social security, entitlements and excessive overseas debt. The chickens will come home to roost... will we wake up before the bill for all this excess comes due? http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?arti...281474977586376 ............................................................................ Mona said it best, goodnight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marolyn Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 As far as giving up on Bin Laden and going after Sadam: Of course! Ideally we should have gotten both of them, but we could not have done both simultaneously and Sadam was clearly a more dangerous target - here's why: Sadam had access to a lot more money and weapons than Bin Laden did - mix that with Sadam's history of instability, and you have the perfect terrorist... only Sadam wouldn't have flew a plane into a building... he would have flew a nuclear bomb into a whole city. doc, doc, doc...do you even remember the iraq war???...how we "rolled" through this "dangerous" character's own country while he crawled into a hole??? if he was such an "imminent" threat with access to such dangerous "weapons of mass destruction" how come he didn't use them against us as we strolled right into his own territory...how come he didn't use that "nuke" you claim he had access to...not like we we didn't give him any warning we were stopping by...saving it for a rainy day, perhaps? To even ask how Obama is doing so soon is absolute silliness anyway. Just a thread for people to bitch about Obama without a month behind him yet... noooo.....more like a thread to discuss the progress he is making and the direction he wants to move in...and really not interested in the "getting the republican's back on track" thread. 5) Regarding the military: There was no draft. It's never good to go to war, but everyone in Iraq volunteered to fight, and if some of them don't believe in the war, why are they volunteering to be there? (Yes I realize other things come into play) seeing as you are currently on the job hunt...may i suggest that you look into the military from which you could gain a perspective to see how ridiculous that last comment happens to be...they are always looking for a "few good men" so if you think you can hang, i have a friend who is a lead engineer at NAVAIR in pax river, md...pm me and i'll hook you up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slagfarmer Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 One thing is for sure anywhere you are .If you want to start a argument then just talk about religion or politics or why Robert plant wont join Led Zeppelin for a reunion tour . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurious Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Allot of bills being passed but stop appointing people to your staff that are not paying taxes, under new investigations I guess ABOVE most be Bush's fault. I have a great idea!!! Let's run a military budget exactly to our deficit!!! Whaddya think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zepyep Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Hi all, Why did this man, ruin an opportunity like this? KB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 noooo.....more like a thread to discuss the progress he is making and the direction he wants to move in...and really not interested in the "getting the republican's back on track" thread. Marolyn, i didn't mean to make it sound like your purpose of this thread was silly. I apologize if you felt insulted by that comment. But naturally, when you ask a question like this, you are going to have the Conservatives blasting Obama, and there is no way to fairly judge him so soon. It's like they forget why our country is in such hardship right now and all they can do is criticize people who didn't cause this mess...but haven't yet fixed it (i mean it's going on a month already, why are we still in a depression, why hasn't Bin Laden been caught, why is the planet still warming!) Again, i didn't mean for the comment to be insulting to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mona Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I FULLY UNDERSTAND YOUR P.O.V... What I don't understand is why you think eliminating the very high potential for the deaths of millions while helping to liberate a country is less important than chasing around someone who has the potential to kill only thousands. Can you please elaborate on this? Your take on how it should have gone would have been REACTIVE path, which is not even close to being ideal when you're running a fu[king country. Look man, for someone who claims to be just trying to "open up our minds," you're really bad at accepting other points of view yourself. If you're not open to other ideas, then you have no business trying to get other people open to them as well. And I've answered your questions. I've said everything that I think needs to be said on the subject. It's all there, all my reasoning, if you go back and read my posts. Talking with you is like running in circles. It's completely useless because you keep insisting on coming back to the same point, and as a result, we never get anywhere. Frankly, I think you're an idiot and it's no longer worth my time or energy to continue this conversation with you. So I'm not going to. Oh, and also: if you're going to say "fucking," just say it. Stop with that dumb bracket thing in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie1971 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 One thing is for sure anywhere you are .If you want to start a argument then just talk about religion or politics or why Robert plant wont join Led Zeppelin for a reunion tour . Yeah, why won't Robert join them for a tour! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marolyn Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 Marolyn, i didn't mean to make it sound like your purpose of this thread was silly. I apologize if you felt insulted by that comment. But naturally, when you ask a question like this, you are going to have the Conservatives blasting Obama, and there is no way to fairly judge him so soon. It's like they forget why our country is in such hardship right now and all they can do is criticize people who didn't cause this mess...but haven't yet fixed it (i mean it's going on a month already, why are we still in a depression, why hasn't Bin Laden been caught, why is the planet still warming!) Again, i didn't mean for the comment to be insulting to you. silly and insulting???...my purpose in life...no worries... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 silly and insulting???...my purpose in life...no worries... Well in that case...i think you are needed in some of the really silly threads, like the ones started by Conservatives, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dzldoc Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Well in that case...i think you are needed in some of the really silly threads, like the ones started by Conservatives, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Real funny... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Marolyn: Is anything I said about the military wrong? For one reason or the next, everyone in the military has volunteered.., and I did add the disclaimer at the end noting that other things come into play. I never said I didn't appreciate those men or women, and it sounds like that's the idea you got from it. Mona: I'm flattered you got defensive and pulled the "you're an idiot" card because I was able to debate against your theories with a non-popular POV... says a lot about your character. Tangerine: I'm 24 and have my Bachelors now, but I'll be the first to tell you I got a D in Economics. I went to college to become a mechanical engineer, and couldn't afford to waste time with courses I'd never use. Were you trying to imply that I'm young and therefore stupid with your "101" shot? It makes me wonder why 18 is the legal voting age rather than 40. P.S. before you start equating that horrible grade to my level of intellect, I can assure you my overall GPA has never once dipped below 3.3 in my 19 years of going to school, though most of the time it was more like 3.7. To everyone: No need to get defensive because I am able to debate the opposite or non-popular views. Most of the time I debate just for the sake of debate. If you don't quite understand something I've said, I'd love to elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dzldoc Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Real funny... Well...you can be the one with the stick if you promise not to leave any bruises Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 It's like they forget why our country is in such hardship right now and all they can do is criticize people who didn't cause this mess...but haven't yet fixed it (i mean it's going on a month already, why are we still in a depression, why hasn't Bin Laden been caught, why is the planet still warming!) Again, i didn't mean for the comment to be insulting to you. I'd love to see some data on this global warming - scientists have already proven no such thing exists. However, if you were referring to the naturally occurring shift of the Earth's climate, it will be over in a few thousand years. What the government doesn't want you to know is that they're running with this^ to make themselves look like they care about something other than power/money. Appear to care for the environment by making it mandatory for companies to research alternative fuels and renewable energy? Pure genius. Not only will the public love them for "caring", making such things mandatory forces non-government owned industries into spending their own money on research in emerging areas. These advances will ultimately benefit the government down the road. In essence, the government effectively uses everyone but themselves to: 1) do all the work researching and developing new technologies 2) save $$$ and by not having to fund or back any of it themselves 3) look damn good doing it. As far as the depression, I'd imagine it will go on as long as people remain scared to spend money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Marolyn, i didn't mean to make it sound like your purpose of this thread was silly. I apologize if you felt insulted by that comment. But naturally, when you ask a question like this, you are going to have the Conservatives blasting Obama, and there is no way to fairly judge him so soon. It's like they forget why our country is in such hardship right now and all they can do is criticize people who didn't cause this mess...but haven't yet fixed it (i mean it's going on a month already, why are we still in a depression, why hasn't Bin Laden been caught, why is the planet still warming!) Again, i didn't mean for the comment to be insulting to you. If McCain had won, TypeO would be saying the thing about you liberals blasting him, which no doubt you would have. Republicans and Democrats, round and round Christ, you're both to blame for America's problems. It's not which one, it's both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marolyn Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 5) Regarding the military: There was no draft. It's never good to go to war, but everyone in Iraq volunteered to fight, and if some of them don't believe in the war, why are they volunteering to be there? (Yes I realize other things come into play) Marolyn: Is anything I said about the military wrong? For one reason or the next, everyone in the military has volunteered.., and I did add the disclaimer at the end noting that other things come into play. I never said I didn't appreciate those men or women, and it sounds like that's the idea you got from it. i made no inference to your appreciation or lack thereof...but your statement saying they are volunteering to be there displays your lack of knowledge of how the u.s. military works from which i merely suggested you could better educate yourself on the inner workings by joining up as it would be mutually beneficial to your level of military intelligence and the current shortfall of military recruiting efforts...how's that for run-on? (p.s. the individual military personnel do not get to pick and choose which wars they want to participate in..."sir you are going to iraq"..."umm, no thank you"... ) ...this was the obama thread, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 If McCain had won, TypeO would be saying the thing about you liberals blasting him, which no doubt you would have. Hey! I resemble that remark! :lolo: i made no inference to your appreciation or lack thereof...but your statement saying they are volunteering to be there displays your lack of knowledge of how the u.s. military works from which i merely suggested you could better educate yourself on the inner workings by joining up as it would be mutually beneficial to your level of military intelligence and the current shortfall of military recruiting efforts...how's that for run-on? (p.s. the individual military personnel do not get to pick and choose which wars they want to participate in..."sir you are going to iraq"..."umm, no thank you"... ) ...this was the obama thread, right? So in joining the military, there's no thought of actually being involved in military conflict? That never even occurs to those who sign up voluntarily? Especially those who have joined during the past 6 years while we've actually been involved in an ongoing war? Just gimme that college education and technology training and I'll be on my way to a nice job, thanks! Oh, and please be sure to include a snarky allusion to my lack of knowledge about the military since I only work on a military base as a civilian and am not actually a current member of the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marolyn Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 5) Regarding the military: There was no draft. It's never good to go to war, but everyone in Iraq volunteered to fight, and if some of them don't believe in the war, why are they volunteering to be there? (Yes I realize other things come into play) So in joining the military, there's no thought of actually being involved in military conflict? That never even occurs to those who sign up voluntarily? Especially those who have joined during the past 6 years while we've actually been involved in an ongoing war? Just gimme that college education and technology training and I'll be on my way to a nice job, thanks! Oh, and please be sure to include a snarky allusion to my lack of knowledge about the military since I only work on a military base as a civilian and am not actually a current member of the military. congrats on that job...obviously it does not require that you pay attention to detail... if you possessed that skill, you would have understood from docron's comments above that he assumes a) all of the soldiers in iraq volunteered to be in iraq and b ) all of the soldiers there believe in the iraq war... simply not true... if you claim to be a "supporter" of the iraq war, i suggest you also request some tdy over there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 congrats on that job...obviously it does not require that you pay attention to detail... if you possessed that skill, you would have understood from docron's comments above that he assumes a) all of the soldiers in iraq volunteered to be in iraq and b ) all of the soldiers there believe in the iraq war... simply not true... if you claim to be a "supporter" of the iraq war, i suggest you also request some tdy over there... Some soldiers may not believe in the war, but they're still volunteering (and acknowledging that they may fight and die) to serve their country when it's in need. So what's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.