The Obscenity Police Are Coming

[Straight Shooter]

You have a deluded view on taxation. The truth about "conservative" tax strategy is they want to eliminate the social safety net that President Roosevelt passed with the New Deal. That's been their real agenda since Reagan.

http://www.thenation.com/article/169882/how-paul-ryan-would-decimate-new-deal#
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57497502/the-pledge-grover-norquists-hold-on-the-gop/



You're painfully uninformed on the topic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/mitt-romney-aide-promises_n_1687210.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/business/gas-prices-are-out-of-any-presidents-control.html



When you decide to make some coherent and cogent arguments, try again.

Doesn't it feel good to call people out on their bullshit especially when you know you have facts on your side

 

[xfire]

Doesn't it feel good to call people out on their bullshit especially when you know you have facts on your side

Absolutely, and I didn't even get hateful about it. lol

 

[xfire]

I have attended Tea Party rallies, though not for a couple of years, not that active in the Tea party now as I was back in '09-'10 (for the mid term elections). I do agree with their view on government waste and abuse, that government has grown too large to the point of unsustainability (long word there, impressed yet?) and especially their views on taxes. I have come to the conclusion that conservatives see taxes as a way of paying for the government's limited duties while liberals see taxes as a way of "leveling the playing field", in other words, if you get too rich that's unfair therefore we need to cut you down to size.

I forgot a particularly damaging piece of evidence against your idiotic tax argument. How's that tea tasting? Like kool-aid, one would think.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

 

[Rey C.]

Through treaties with the UN, thus nullifying the Constitution, and America's sovereignty.

It's been a long, long, long time since I took civics. But unless the laws governing this country have changed massively over the past 40+ years, a treaty of this sort would have to be ratified by a two thirds majority of the United States Senate. The President cannot accomplish such a thing on his own. And anyway, there is no realistic or rational possibility that Obama or any other President could or would attempt such an implausible thing.

I understand that your concerns are sincere, Rev. But in light of you stating the true basis of your concerns, I just don't find them to be all that realistic or rational. It would be like me spending ten times as much to build a house that could resist a direct meteor hit. Sure, it could happen. But really now, what are the true odds?

There is a principle relating to the stock market called The Theory of Rational Expectations. There are people who'll buy a stock for a dollar and create dreams/fantasies about that stock some day hitting $1000/share. Now, there is the case of Apple, where that may come close to happening. But in most situations, that is not a rational expectation. Maybe step back and give some additional thought to what it would take to make your theory work, and see how you feel then.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

It's been a long, long, long time since I took civics. But unless the laws governing this country have changed massively over the past 40+ years, a treaty of this sort would have to be ratified by a two thirds majority of the United States Senate. The President cannot accomplish such a thing on his own. And anyway, there is no realistic or rational possibility that Obama or any other President could or would attempt such an implausible thing.

I understand that your concerns are sincere, Rev. But in light of you stating the true basis of your concerns, I just don't find them to be all that realistic or rational. It would be like me spending ten times as much to build a house that could resist a direct meteor hit. Sure, it could happen. But really now, what are the true odds?

There is a principle relating to the stock market called The Theory of Rational Expectations. There are people who'll buy a stock for a dollar and create dreams/fantasies about that stock some day hitting $1000/share. Now, there is the case of Apple, where that may come close to happening. But in most situations, that is not a rational expectation. Maybe step back and give some additional thought to what it would take to make your theory work, and see how you feel then.

I see your point, but I'm the kind of person that would worry about the meteor! Honestly. guns are just one of the things about him, that truly concerns me. Don't get me wrong, romney's no fucking prize by any stretch of the imagination, but I just don't feel obama's been a good president. I feel he's wasted 4 years on healthcare, I don't think he's spent enough efforts on gas prices, and the unemployment rate....and immigration. I know this country was founded on it, but free passes for ANYONE, is unacceptable to me. I just put the 2nd Amendment at the top of my priority list...we all prioritize our issues, mine are what they are.

On the other end, I just have a gut feeling that won't stop nagging me...I can't help it, I just cannot trust him, or believe he has this country in his best interest.

 

[xfire]

On the other end, I just have a gut feeling that won't stop nagging me...I can't help it, I just cannot trust him, or believe he has this country in his best interest.

I'm so sick of this bullshit argument, and it's not you particularly. Moons and goochers, anyone?

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I'm so sick of this bullshit argument, and it's not you particularly. Moons and goochers, anyone?

It's a reason, not an excuse. If you read back over one of my posts, it states that, I can't expect my gut feeling to be taken as an argument why, it's just what I use as a gauge for myself. I find it funny that more people don't use there own intuition.

 

[Johan]

I just put the 2nd Amendment at the top of my priority list...we all prioritize our issues, mine are what they are.

So if Romney would tele "I'll make the economy collapse, unemloyement will reach reach 20%, salaries will go way down, and, if I were you I would avoid to need a doctor... but I promise you one thing : gun laws will stay how they are." you would vote for him ?

 

[xfire]

It's a reason, not an excuse. If you read back over one of my posts, it states that, I can't expect my gut feeling to be taken as an argument why, it's just what I use as a gauge for myself. I find it funny that more people don't use there own intuition.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and called it an argument, not an excuse, but if you prefer to call it a reason, that's just quibbling over semantics. http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-reason-or-an-excuse/2011/05/03/AFkFWB5G_story.html

My intuition tells me Romney is a rat bastard and there's plenty of evidence to back it up.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and called it an argument, not an excuse, but if you prefer to call it a reason, that's just quibbling over semantics. http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-reason-or-an-excuse/2011/05/03/AFkFWB5G_story.html

My intuition tells me Romney is a rat bastard and there's plenty of evidence to back it up.

Oh fuck yeah he is, and I won't argue that, but people will believe what they want, and usually won't change. We are who we are.

So if Romney would tele "I'll make the economy collapse, unemloyement will reach reach 20%, salaries will go way down, and, if I were you I would avoid to need a doctor... but I promise you one thing : gun laws will stay how they are." you would vote for him ?

No, but if obama said he would guarantee he would not go after guns, and leave the laws as they are...I wouldn't vote for him either.

 

[Rey C.]

I see your point, but I'm the kind of person that would worry about the meteor! Honestly. guns are just one of the things about him, that truly concerns me. Don't get me wrong, romney's no fucking prize by any stretch of the imagination, but I just don't feel obama's been a good president. I feel he's wasted 4 years on healthcare, I don't think he's spent enough efforts on gas prices, and the unemployment rate....and immigration. I know this country was founded on it, but free passes for ANYONE, is unacceptable to me. I just put the 2nd Amendment at the top of my priority list...we all prioritize our issues, mine are what they are.

On the other end, I just have a gut feeling that won't stop nagging me...I can't help it, I just cannot trust him, or believe he has this country in his best interest.

That's cool. We can just agree to disagree. The 2nd Amendment is important to me as well. But it's not the primary issue when I vote. My primary issues are the domestic economy and foreign policy (a distant second). Things like gun control, abortion, porn, immigration, education, etc. are down the line for me. The economy is my biggest issue.

For some reason, Romney refuses to go into detail about what his plans for the economy would be... that aren't just a re-print of the (obviously) failed policies of W. Bush. He said again today (or yesterday) that he was just about ready to start talking details. Just like I'm just about ready to propose to my girlfriend, eh? And on foreign policy, the past few weeks have not been kind to Mitt. From the dust-up at the London Olympics, to the thing about China, to the thing about Russia and now to this thing about Libya and Egypt... he's making Sarah P@lin look like a foreign policy expert. When even conservative Republicans and the Wall Street Journal begin taking shots at you, you're out to lunch as a GOP candidate. IMO (and the opinion of several on the far right), Mitt is a moderate actor playing the part of a conservative. Trouble is, he's not a very good actor.

It's not that I like Obama so much. But kind of like you with Obama maybe, I just do not trust and do not like the Mittster. If he was being himself, hell, I might warm up to him. But he's had to play this part, pretending to be what he's not, for so long, I don't think the guy even knows who is is any more. He is definitely not a stupid guy. But people (even on the right) are now questioning his mental and emotional fitness to handle this job... worried that he might crack up, I guess. :dunno:

And on this particular topic, I remember the dark days of Reagan's boy, Ed Meese, all too well. Another one like that again? Not just no, but hell no! Like I said, porn is not a primary issue for me, but... nopey. :nono: