Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 03:43pm PT
|
I wish more people would listen to Krugman.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 03:43pm PT
|
Well said John.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 03:57pm PT
|
Listen to yourself, "abstinence is not a bad thing".
Who said it was a "bad thing?? The issue is, abstinence ONLY sex ed is not effective (based on data, not how you "feel"about it). Rates of teenage sexual intercourse went UP when abstinence only was implemented. It says "don't do it" and provides no education for the inevitable amount of kids who WILL do it. Teenagers will f*#k, they always have, they always will. The most powerful drive in nature will not succumb to religious moralizing about what they shouldn't do.
Typical republican tripe, project motives onto people with no basis in reality (libruls think it's a bad thing), ignore data that shows how ineffective the policy is, and then invoke tribalism as why you just have to cling to the failed policies of your "team". The biggest difference I see between the left and right is the left prefers data-driven policy whereas the right prefers moralizing wtihout regard for results (while simulatenously being the biggest hypocrites in history).
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:07pm PT
|
Lois, to my eye, F's frustration with you is pretty similar to Moosie's- difference is, F pretty much gave up hope that you might ever open your mind a bit, and he expresses his frustration in a much more abrasive manner.
That tendency towards over-simplification & stereotyping is all-too-common in these threads. It takes effort and discipline to learn- qualities that seem to becoming increasingly scarce.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:09pm PT
|
Huck seems like a pleasant enough guy, but so was W.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:11pm PT
|
"I don't think liberals hate the military, they hate any use of it"
Is that the kind of oversimplification you were referring to, Moosie? Yes, I thought so.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:15pm PT
|
I guess he's referring to FDR's hatred of the use of military force.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Row, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:16pm PT
|
Look up Neville Chamberlain.
fattrad, you refer to the Conservative Party Prime Minister?
You Republicans sure were quick to grasp the concept of double think, I'll give you that.
The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:18pm PT
|
This is one of those work days where I have about five minutes for lunch, so here goes. . .
The rhetoric on both ends of the political spectrum can be quite venomous -- rather like U.S. presidential elections of 1864 and 1884. In fact, many of the extremes on either side are dissatisfied with both parties because both Democrats and Republicans (and even normal conservatives and liberals) represent compromisers rather than purists. Sure, the conservatives prefer lower taxes and a less intrusive government than we currently have, and liberals prefer a more involved government in the economy supported by higher taxes.
In fact, though, we agree much more than we disagree, and this is particularly true with our long-term goals for the country and society. Unfortunately, agreement doesn't sell entertainment, nor does it allow for easy unseating of incumbents, so we emphasize our difference to the point of exaggeration.
The rhetoric of the liberals is that "the rich" don't pay "their fair share" whatever that is, and the conservatives "coddle" the rich and Big Business. The rhetoric on the right is that current government exists for the benefit of government workers and recipients of government largesse, and that Democrats "coddle" these groups to buy votes. During that last 45 years, the conservatives have been more ready to use military force than the liberals; this represents a change from, say, the first half of the 20th century when the conservatives were isolationist while the liberals were more interventionist.
I do believe that more liberals than conservatives think that the economy is a zero-sum game, but if I had to generalize, I would say that this is partly a function of education. The simplistic, populist, movements in the United States have more of a tendency toward a zero-sum economic basis.
Assuredly, though, people in both political camps are complex and defy easy analysis, Dr. F's assertions that my side is always wrong to the contrary notwithstanding. Ronald Reagan did raise taxes and support abortion rights at times. Bill Clinton was instrumental in negotiating NAFTA and getting it and welfare reform passed by congress. George W. Bush signed on to a prescription drug benefit for Medicare, and Barak Obama continued Bush's policies in the War on Terror.
I go back to what I said last week. Demonizing each other and the leaders of our various institutions is weakening the United States. We need to cut each other a bit of slack -- though maybe we should place a little more protection as a result! ;-)
John
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Row, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:22pm PT
|
But, then what would we do on the Internets for fun?
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:22pm PT
|
I don't think liberals hate the military, they hate any use of it,
FACT: Obama ordered raid that killed Bin Laden.
FACT: FDR won WWII
FACT: Many liberals around here served in our military, in stark contrast to you chickenhawk conservatives.
FACT: As usual, yer full of sh#t.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 04:46pm PT
|
Sure, the conservatives (claim to) prefer lower taxes and a less intrusive government than we currently have, and (claim that) liberals prefer a more involved government in the economy supported by higher taxes.
Perhaps overstating things a bit, and assuming that conservative = Republican. For the last several decades the Democratic party has tended to be the most consservative (apart from often minor social issues), and the Republican party the most radical. But making the point that whatever the parties claim in their rhetoric, the reality is quite different. There's little doubt that at the federal level, the Democrats have largely worked for a balanced budget, prudent finances, a limited role for government, and a moderate foreign and military policy, while the Republicans have not.
That's a difficult conundrum, for me anyway. The Republicans vociferously claim to advocate a variety of things, very few of which they actually enact when in power, as they have been for most of the last 30 years. (Or at least holding a bully-veto, as at present.) Their rhetoric and their actions are quite different. Which may the reason why so many traditional conservatives can no longer stomach the radicals who have taken over their party.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 05:09pm PT
|
FACT: Obama screwed aroung with Libya for months and almost blew it.
Hahahaha. He got Libya EXACTLY RIGHT. No American boots on the ground, no long term commitment of forces, at a low cost, with the same end effect...deposing a crazy dictator....of your boy Dubya's financial sinkhole and general disaster called Iraq.
FACT: Many conservatives served in the military and I was a reserve deputy sheriff, I've seen combat
Hahaha, "combat", lolol...whut evah you say chickenhawk. Fighting over whether you or your fellow "play-acting at being the po-po" partner has to buy the donuts is NOT considered "combat".
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 05:14pm PT
|
FACT: FDR waited until 2360 were killed at Pearl Harbor before joining the war.
Another fine bit of Republo-revisionism. Roosevelt and the Democrats supported the Allies in every way they could until Pearl Harbour, and the German (de jure) and Japanese (de facto) declarations of war, made it a hot war. He was strenuously resisted by the Republican isolationists, led in 1940 by Wendell Wilkie. They knew full well that eventually the US would enter the war, but to appease their constituents pretended otherwise.
Roosevelt did everything he could to get the US involved, including Lend-Lease, and his declaration in spring 1941 that US would sink German warships in the western Atlantic. He also greatly increased military spending.
There is an issue about the US not promptly joining in wars (1914, 1939) in which it clearly had a national interest, and to support its allies, but that's mostly related to Republican isolationists.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 05:33pm PT
|
you should have no opinion on the military since you never served
You just can't help being wrong about everything, can you?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Row, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 06:02pm PT
|
That's a difficult conundrum, for me anyway. The Republicans vociferously claim to advocate a variety of things, very few of which they actually enact when in power, as they have been for most of the last 30 years. (Or at least holding a bully-veto, as at present.) Their rhetoric and their actions are quite different. Which may the reason why so many traditional conservatives can no longer stomach the radicals who have taken over their party.
Doublethink. They are the masters.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 06:06pm PT
|
Did anyone even bother to vet anything before they shelled out taxpayer monies for these warm and fuzzy ventures.
That's less than .001 of the stimulus package.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 06:33pm PT
|
Lois, you need to do better than simply saying it's an example of the stim's failures.
Got more examples that add up to a significant % of failures?
The article posted above mentioned McCain's econ guy--and no, it's not Fatty--Mark Zandi as saying the stim created 2,000,000 jobs. If anything, the stim was inadequate.
BTW, where is conservative outrage over wasteful spending in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade?
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 06:40pm PT
|
Obama's Green jobs is morphing in Obama payback scams for political cronies.
George Kaiser, OK oil millionaire, and political bundler of campaign cash for Obama in 2008 got the Solyndra gig as payback for his hard work
twisting arms to get donations for Barry's presidential run.
If they can prove it was a classic pump and dump scheme to rip off tax payers money its all over and he'll plead.
BTW - those Chinese solar panels have been very competitive longer than Solyndra has existed. George Kaiser will have to prove he's an idiot and did not know to escape charges.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2775408/posts
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 06:44pm PT
|
But it is emblematic of the whole problem. They hear the word green and they conclude that it must be a panacea "good" thing.
Do you see this Lois? you complain about not being respected for being intelligent, but on a daily basis you insult liberals intelligence. We are sooooo dumb that all one has to do to get anything passed is label it green.
...
Jeff.. I don't hate the military.. I hate the misuse of it. Russia went into Afghanistan and nearly bankrupted itself. Bin Laden said this was his plan of attack against America. To cause us to engaged in wars that would suck us dry. So far he is succeeding, even though he is now dead. Afghanistan is a tribal mess which has become a sucking wound, just like Vietnam was. We should have bombed the crap out of al Queda's training camps, and otherwise stayed the heck out of there. And we should not have gone into Iraq. Even George Bush senior understood that.
What you wanted with Iraq was a military base in the middle east that had no strings attached. Where we had carte blanche to do whatever we wanted. That was your entire justification for going into Iraq. That is imperialism, which is why I said what I did to you the other day.
How will we ever get out of Afghanistan? Do you even want to? You once said that we needed to be there 50 years. Isn't that more imperialism in the guise of Nation building?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!