Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Obama will not win a second term
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(9)
Message 33 of 311 (667894)
07-13-2012 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by foreveryoung
07-12-2012 10:06 PM


What gets lost in these blank and white debates over who is at fault is that the right answer is probably that they ALL are at fault.
The repeal of depression era regulations that created the bubble in Bush's term was actually passed at the end of the Clinton administration. A democratic signature on bills crafted by republicans for the express purpose of allowing the recklessness that happened.
Bush though, was well on board with all of this. He presided over weak and lazy regulators and allowed them to perpetuate the revolving door of WallStreet execs who become regulators and vice-versa.
I am a big Obama fan but I will be 100% honest when I say this is a place where I totally think he has failed. His support of the CFPB is a small step in the right direction but he basically has been just as accomodating. Nearly his entire economic team are the same kind of guys who believe that a strong financial sector = a strong economy. They just have a (D) after their name instead of an (R) and so are less ideologically opposed to regulation.
The only bright spot has been the rise of Elizabeth Warren and her "wing" of the Democratic party. Obama can probably legitimatly be credited for that.
So was it Bush's fault? Yes. But like many true things, reality is more complicated and he certainly isn't the SOLE person at fault.
Cutting taxes while we are at war is also just plain stupid....REALLY REALLY stupid.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by foreveryoung, posted 07-12-2012 10:06 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by 1.61803, posted 07-13-2012 10:57 AM Jazzns has replied
 Message 35 by crashfrog, posted 07-13-2012 11:16 AM Jazzns has replied
 Message 60 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 1:30 AM Jazzns has not replied
 Message 66 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 2:18 AM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(1)
Message 36 of 311 (667898)
07-13-2012 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by crashfrog
07-13-2012 11:16 AM


I agree mostly.
I don't recall how low interest rates were in 2002 for this particular circumstance.
The problem is that the tax cuts created a structural deficit situation and then the war on top of that made it worse.
I hear what you are saying which that the notion of the-sky-is-falling when we are in debt is wrong. My problem is that Bush was asking the nation to make sacrafices while at the same time was handing out piles of cash and it setup a combined fiscal-political situation that is strangling us today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by crashfrog, posted 07-13-2012 11:16 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(3)
Message 37 of 311 (667899)
07-13-2012 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by 1.61803
07-13-2012 10:57 AM


I think I hate democratic wusses more. Its easy to hate people like Paul Ryan, devotee of Ayan Rand who is very explicit about how he wants to screw over his fellow man. It is much more infuriating when democrats don't speak up like they should.
It is unfortunate that some of the best champions for progressivism were swept away in 2010 like Russ Feingold and Alan Grayson. They stood on principle and we let them down by not showing up. We need more people like them so that we have some damn solidarity in congress.
We can start to make up for things by getting Elizabeth Warren into the Senate and Grayson back his seat in the house. Obama win or loose, it is a 4 year issue (not to diminish it too much). Warren in the Senate could be a firebrand for decades and it could be a stepping stone on the way to the first woman president.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by 1.61803, posted 07-13-2012 10:57 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 12:20 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(2)
Message 44 of 311 (667911)
07-13-2012 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Jon
07-13-2012 12:20 PM


No. That was just my way of expressing support for Elizabeth Warren.
Can I ask why you tend to pick out the most innocuous things from my posts that don't relate whatsoever to the main point I was making?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 12:20 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 4:05 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(2)
Message 47 of 311 (667916)
07-13-2012 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Jon
07-13-2012 4:05 PM


My post was about progressives that I feel need to be elected into or back into congress. It had nothing to do with a debate about gender discrimination in politics.
If Elizabeth Warren had a penis, I would still advocate for him to be elected the senator of Massachussets with the hope of being president someday.
Now, should I expect a reply from you concerning how I post too much about penises? Or is too much to ask that you read to understand the points being made rather than the words that were chosen to express those points?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 4:05 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 4:38 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(3)
Message 54 of 311 (667927)
07-13-2012 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Jon
07-13-2012 4:38 PM


Is it possible to ignore the latter while still understanding the former?
Yes. 100% of my post was talking about plight of progressivism in politics. The words 'first female president' had nothing to do with starting an argument about women vs men being better at whatever.
That sub-theme is something that originated in your imagination. My post was something like 200 words of me NOT making an argument about gender politics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Jon, posted 07-13-2012 4:38 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 73 of 311 (667961)
07-14-2012 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by foreveryoung
07-14-2012 2:18 AM


Re: The Roots of the Subprime Mortgage Mess Have Clinton All Over Them
I too can also debate by link.
Bush’s Philosophy Stoked the Mortgage Bonfire - The New York Times
The problem isn't in the many presidents and congresses that did the deregulation, it is in the fact that our political system is run by the people who pay the bills for campaigns. Campaigns that are now more expensive than ever. Getting elected president "costs" about a billion dollars now. Thats insane.
The elections are OURS and therefore WE should pay for them with robust public financing and strong limits on outside influence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 2:18 AM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by jar, posted 07-14-2012 1:38 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(3)
Message 78 of 311 (667967)
07-14-2012 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by foreveryoung
07-14-2012 1:48 PM


Re: The Roots of the Subprime Mortgage Mess Have Clinton All Over Them
you let the media and unions dominate what is said on tv and radio
Nobody said that campaigns couldn't run TV and radio ads. They should just be paid for after a candidate qualifies for public financing.
As it stands right now, < 2% of people contribute to campaigns. Who do you think those candidates listen to most? Its the money first, the voters second. If the money that they get was from public financing, then at the very least the burden of pacifying their donors for the sake of money is gone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 1:48 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 9:07 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(8)
Message 93 of 311 (668000)
07-15-2012 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by foreveryoung
07-14-2012 9:07 PM


Re: The Roots of the Subprime Mortgage Mess Have Clinton All Over Them
These conservatives are often dirt poor and they appreciate that someone has enough money to get their point of view out.
I might agree with you if the policies that these ads are pushing actually helped the dirt poor.
The "conservative" message now is that Obama is trying to do TOO MUCH for the poor.
Plus, that is besides the point that nobody suggested that advocacy for issues be limited. If the Koch brothers want to spend a few million dollars trying to convince people that Ayan Rand was a goddess and that people need to get with the new libertarianism because selfishness is good, that's fine.
But the campaigns that advertise the candidates and their positions should be funded by the public. There is a very simple reason for this, they are OUR campaigns not those of the people running. They are public servants the moment they decide to run and nothing would make that more real than if they were no longer slaves to rich donors; but rather servants to the public commons as they logically should be.

BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by foreveryoung, posted 07-14-2012 9:07 PM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 07-15-2012 6:50 PM Jazzns has replied
 Message 100 by Phat, posted 07-17-2012 12:47 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 95 of 311 (668007)
07-15-2012 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by crashfrog
07-15-2012 6:50 PM


Public Campaign Financing
What do you propose that is actually different than what we have?
Have it be compulsory and without necessitating matching funds. Also, go back to outlawing unlimited electioneering by corporations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 07-15-2012 6:50 PM crashfrog has seen this message but not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(3)
Message 213 of 311 (669976)
08-07-2012 10:50 AM


Romney will not win a first term...
I found this quote to be interesting.
From: Harry Reid: Mitt's secrecy 'has nothing to do with me'
Pelosi's backing Reid, Reid's chief of staff is calling the Romney people "cowards," the Romney people are saying it's all Obama's fault, the guy whose candidate has spent an entire year claiming Obama went on something called an "apology tour" is calling Reid a "dirty liar" and, in the middle of it all ...
... is Mitt Romney, who still thinks all of this is better than what would happen if he showed America how much money he made and how much tax he paid on it.
Anybody who didn't think that Obama was going to be fodder for desperate conservatives to re-re-re-re-re-use the fear card is a bit naive. But elections are choices between more than just This-Guy and Not-This-Guy, they are choices between This-Guy and THAT-Guy.
Republicans have BAD canidates! Think about ANY ONE of the clowns who ran in the GOP primary running a national campaign right now.
Also, think about the future choices. Democratic pickups tend to be higher quality statesmen/women while Republicans in 2010 replaced old guard pansie Democrats with hard line right wing freaks. Their pool of future political talent consists of impressive guys like deadbeat dad Joe Walsh and complete nutjob Allen West.
Citizens United is life support for a dying party hanging onto a dying share of the electorate. Progressives need to be FAR less worried about how it is going to empower Republicans to win that its potential to corrupt Democrats by its siren song.

BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(5)
Message 279 of 311 (670567)
08-16-2012 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by foreveryoung
08-16-2012 9:26 AM


Re: Out of context, the Bible says "there is no God"
So Steve Jobs,
Educated all of his employees from birth?
Built the schools that carried out that education?
Paved all the roads that carry iPads to to stores or consumer's doors?
Built the bridges for the same purpose?
Built a national airport and air traffic control system to make sure that his people and products can move quickly to where they need to be?
Hired and pays the judges who enforce that his contracts are honored?
Hired and pays the patent officers who protect his intellectual property?
Hires the police that keep Apple stores from being ransacked by thieves?
Pays for the infastructure that keeps his stored powered, with proper sanitation?
Pays for the street lights that make his customers feel safe travelling to his stores?
I can probably think up a ton more.
So did he do all of those things? Did he build those?
Fair warning, these are trick questions.

BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by foreveryoung, posted 08-16-2012 9:26 AM foreveryoung has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024