33
   

The Democratic Convention

 
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:29 am
@Walter Hinteler,
There is a segment of our society who can't wrap their heads around a non-US-centric global economy. I've seen it time and again that any discussion about a global economy that doesn't put America first means you hate America and are out to destroy it. It's the same ego-centric mentality that sees man in dominion over the animals. It's OUR oil, don't you know.... regardless of where it's being pumped from.
CoastalRat
 
  0  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:32 am
@JPB,
Quote:
they HATE the President

Kinda the way the dems hated Bush, but that was ok cause Bush was wicked.

Quote:
including allowing the economy to remain suppressed

Oh yeah, Repubs, who fro half of Obama's term were not the majority in either house, have allowed the economy to remain suppressed. How have they allowed it to remain suppressed? This is the absolute dumbest statement I have heard either you or anyone else make here in A2K, and I've seen some really dumb ones from both repubs and dems.

Quote:
and our credit ratings to be downgraded

Republicans had nothing to do with this. I'm not sure what Obama could have done to prevent this, but it cannot be laid at the door of republicans either.
Quote:

in order to see him defeated

No matter which side holds the presidency, the other side does all they can to see that the sitting president is defeated when the term expires. Again, repubs are no different than dems in that respect.

The lying and manipulation of facts by both sides is disgusting. Neither party can claim the upper ground when it comes to being factual. They twist every fact to put the other side in a bad light rather than lay out how they intend to accomplish the goal of righting our economy and getting people back to work. And the constant finger pointing and name calling from both sides does not help the discussion.

Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:34 am
@JPB,
Okay. But it's a free market, no-one is forced to get oil. There are alternatives, even it is YOURS. And if those alternatives don't work, invent new ones - easy for the USA being the best country in the world for all and everything ....
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  6  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:38 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
No matter which side holds the presidency, the other side does all they can to see that the sitting president is defeated when the term expires. Again, repubs are no different than dems in that respect.


This is the crux of the matter to me and where I think you're wrong. I think both parties have gone overboard on party politics to the point that they're more interested in party than the people. The difference is that I perceive the current manifestation of the Republican party as willing to intentionally keep the economy depressed in order to benefit their own personal (party, not people) agenda.
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:42 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
[Btw: in February 2001, just after Bush took office, the average price of regular gasoline was $1.45 a gallon. By June 2008, that price had risen to $4.05.]

And by November , 2008 the average price was back to $1.87. And when Obama took office it was holding pretty steady at around that same price. Which only proves that gas prices are certainly volatile and it probably does not matter who is president. As you wrote, it is a world commodity and the price is based on many different variables.

That said, there are things that our government can do to affect the price within the US to some degree. It just hasn't been done, by whichever party controlled the WH.
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:42 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
This is the absolute dumbest statement I have heard either you or anyone else make here in A2K, and I've seen some really dumb ones from both repubs and dems.


Thank you. It's an honor I'll carry forward in my heart.
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:47 am
@JPB,
Quote:
Thank you. It's an honor I'll carry forward in my heart.

It will probably be a short-lived honor. I'm sure someone from one side or the other will top you before too long. Heck, it might even be me.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:48 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:
Oh yeah, Repubs, who fro half of Obama's term were not the majority in either house,

And yet they were still willing to grind things to a halt, requiring a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done.
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 07:56 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
And yet they were still willing to grind things to a halt, requiring a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done.

A super majority that the dems basically had from 2008 until Kennedy's death in August, 2009.

Both sides have dug their feet into the ground and refuse to move. All either side is really good at lately is throwing mud at each other, running for re-election and cashing their paychecks. It is what they do best.
Walter Hinteler
 
  0  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:03 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

That said, there are things that our government can do to affect the price within the US to some degree. It just hasn't been done, by whichever party controlled the WH.
Oh, no free market. At least not for gas. But why do you have to pay fortunes for diamonds, steak dinners and 18-year-old Scotch whiskey?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:15 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

Quote:
And yet they were still willing to grind things to a halt, requiring a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done.

A super majority that the dems basically had from 2008 until Kennedy's death in August, 2009.


A time when the economy began to stabilize (unemployment numbers always lag the economy) and ACA was formulated and eventually passed. Even Republicans are now saying that many of the components of ACA are beneficial. My own R representative in the House is campaigning only against "death panels" and advocates allowing students to stay on their parent's health care, forcing insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, and looking at ways to modify medicare/medicaid.

Quote:
Both sides have dug their feet into the ground and refuse to move. All either side is really good at lately is throwing mud at each other, running for re-election and cashing their paychecks. It is what they do best.
Agree completely!
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:35 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
Oh, no free market. At least not for gas.

I think you misunderstand my stance. I have no problem with a free market for gas. I believe in letting the free market determine the price for everything. I don't believe the government should regulate prices. When I mention that there are things the government can do, it has nothing to do with controlling gas prices through some artificial means (such as price caps.)
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  5  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:44 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
Oh yeah, Repubs, who fro half of Obama's term were not the majority in either house, have allowed the economy to remain suppressed. How have they allowed it to remain suppressed?


Are you serious? They used the Filibuster in the Senate to block and water down every single bill they could. You know this is the truth, so why write something so ignorant?

Not only that, but the Republicans instantly pivoted to 'deficit reduction!' as their uniting mantra, which is really odd seeing as every single member of their leadership took vote after vote to RAISE the deficit in the years directly before Obama got in power. They constantly pushed to lower government spending during a time of economic recovery; no other Prez has had to deal with this sort of foot-dragging during a recovery period, in the modern era. Reagan and Bush younger did the exact opposite and that's the prime reason the employment situation improved under their watch.

Quote:
Quote:
and our credit ratings to be downgraded

Republicans had nothing to do with this. I'm not sure what Obama could have done to prevent this, but it cannot be laid at the door of republicans either.


100% wrong. The credit rating downgrade is the fault of the GOP, who decided that - in the face of an impending debt limit vote - the proper action to take was to force a crisis and try and hold the country and Obama hostage to what the House wanted, rather than compromise and make a deal. They intentionally ramped up the pressure in the media, making all sorts of crazy statements about how we should just default on our debt rather than raise the limit; the Tea Party faction revolted, and Boehner had to get support from the Dems in the house in order to pass the bill after his attempt to strongarm Obama fell apart.

The GOP's intransigence on tax raises - during a time when all Americans are paying historically low levels of federal taxes - is a direct driver of the debt limit downgrade. The math necessary to balance our books simply doesn't add up without some form of tax increase! Every economist agrees on this! But, Ideology trumps Reality amongst the modern Republican party, and they decided that acting like spoiled children was more important than doing their goddamn jobs.

The Republicans envisioned a showdown; provoked a showdown; and lost that showdown when Obama didn't give in to their tactics. That, and the drama surrounding it, is the cause of the downgrade. It's also what directly lead to the upcoming Sequester of military funds that they are all now complaining about.

You really need to spend some time reading up on modern history, as it seems you can't remember **** that happened just a year ago, and yet are willing to comment on it.

Quote:
No matter which side holds the presidency, the other side does all they can to see that the sitting president is defeated when the term expires. Again, repubs are no different than dems in that respect.


Factually incorrect. Look at the history of the use of the Filibuster - the GOP has been more intransigent and more obstructive than any minority in our country's history. They didn't wait until the end of Obama's term to defeat him; they decided they were going to defeat him right off the bat, by not allowing him to pass ANYTHING.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/aviary%20(1).jpg?uuid=GzpEUJ7LEeG8pnJ7y9v4Zg

In the House of Representatives, when the GOP was in the minority, they spent weeks calling for 6 'motions to adjourn' a day. Each one of those would then have to be voted on, and they insisted on a voice vote for each one, which takes a lot of time, basically grinding the House to a halt. It was an incredibly juvenile tactic and one that the Dems NEVER engaged in, when they were in the minority for years.

Even Bush - who, as you wrote, was loathed by the Dem minority - wasn't blocked in the fashion that YOUR political party has chosen to block Obama.

You have opinions, but no facts or examination of the historical record to back them up. You're simply incorrect in many of the things you say. I get really ******* tired of having to play fact-checker here at A2K; can't you guys be bothered to look things up before posting them?

Cycloptichorn
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:52 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Every economist agrees on this!

Even Thomas Sowell*?




























*I don't really consider him an economist....
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 08:53 am
@DrewDad,
Haha, I got ready to get huffy before I scrolled down.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 09:22 am
To get back on topic:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/06/ex-bush-aide-on-how-bill-clinton-s-speech-bested-mitt-romney-s.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thedailybeast%2Farticles+%28The+Daily+Beast+-+Latest+Articles%29

Quote:
Here’s why I think Bill Clinton’s speech was successful. For all of his tortured arguments and wonky, ponderous asides, Bill Clinton made a substantive case. He dealt with facts and statistics. He made points and then explained why he made them. He had details. Boy, did he have details. In short, he did what almost no one at the Republican convention tried to do, what few conventions bother to do anymore. He treated the American people like thinking human beings.


See? A substantive case. Exactly what the GOP has been missing this cycle.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 09:35 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:

A super majority that the dems basically had from 2008 until Kennedy's death in August, 2009.


No, they didn't. Franken didn't join the Senate until about one month before Kennedy's death.

Quote:
Franken was sworn in to the Senate on July 7, 2009

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Franken
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  7  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 09:50 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
No matter which side holds the presidency, the other side does all they can to see that the sitting president is defeated when the term expires. Again, repubs are no different than dems in that respect.

The difference in this case, is that the Republicans vowed to defeat Obama, to limit him to one term, from day one of his Presidency. And they've been trying to defeat, and discredit, him every day since day one.
Quote:
Kinda the way the dems hated Bush, but that was ok cause Bush was wicked.

No, the hatred of Obama is far more extreme, and far more pernicious, than anything the Democrats directed at Bush. And the hatred is far more destructive to our country. No one who really cares about this country should want a Presidency, any Presidency, to fail--particularly from day one of that Presidency.

This hatred goes way beyond disagreeing with Obama, the way people disagreed with Bush--it tries to portray Obama as a foreigner, an outsider, not really an American citizen, not really a Christian, not Constitutionally qualified to be President. Do you know what percentage of people still believe he's a Muslim?
And even Romney keeps talking about what he calls Obama's "European ideas", and even he made an off-hand "birther" remark. It's all part of the same theme and message--to view Obama as an outsider, not a "real American", not "one of us."

From which other President has a birth certificate ever been demanded? That really says it all.


georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 09:56 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

There is a segment of our society who can't wrap their heads around a non-US-centric global economy. I've seen it time and again that any discussion about a global economy that doesn't put America first means you hate America and are out to destroy it. It's the same ego-centric mentality that sees man in dominion over the animals. It's OUR oil, don't you know.... regardless of where it's being pumped from.


I don't think there is any notable misunderstanding about the global economy in this country. We have been a major driver of international trade and development for some time and, excerpt under Democrat administrations, have been a consistent champion of free trade, tariff reductions, the WTO and other forums for the advancement of the world economy. In our politics trade restrictions and related limitations on access to our domestic markets come chiefly from Democrats and their organized labor backers.

There are real political & economic issues behind public concerns over the retail price of gasoline, though the generally superficial discourse in our media does indeed tend to trivialize matters making it appear that presidents directly control or are responsible for the retail price of gasoline and other fuels. These issues prominently include government obstruction of the development of domestic sources of petroleum and the efficient transport of gass and petroleum across North America. In addition the idiotic EPA-mandated formulas for additives to gasoline that vary both by region and season fractionalize the national market, refining and distribution systems for gasoline, imposing enormous economic inefficiencies for very marginal environmental benefits.

Finally the political candidates of both parties are quick to claim credit for any good news that occurs on their watch, whether or not it was a result of their work or the earlier actions of others, and equally quick to blame others for bad news. Thus Obama was a few months ago boasting that U.S. domestic petroleum production was at a new high, implying that it was his doing. In fact the surge was a result of exploration/development approvals issued in the previous administration, while Obama had instead rescinded approvals for exploration/development of coastal sources, thereby setting us up for shortages a few years down the road.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2012 09:56 am
@firefly,
Quote:
From which other President has a birth certificate ever been demanded? That really says it all.


Word
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 08:51:19