So if BO and his recking crew are not trying to dismantle our free market system aka America, why would they want to take over car companies, financial institutions, drive health insurance companies out of business, add trillions and trillions of debt, not care about job creation, put programs in place (cap-n-tax) and others that will basically drive families to bankruptcy? The list goes on and on.

None of his actions create any jobs but in fact are job killers. Tax revenues to the governments are dropping like a rock and at the same time government spending is skyrocketing to levels never seen our our history.

Forget about Glenn Beck or any other messenger you happen to hate. BO's actions are as plain as day. Any rational common sense thinking person can't come to any other conclusion.

Bucco: *Thank* you. And I'm not being facetious or sarcastic. It always helps a *debate* when you know where the other person is coming from.

Now, I wasn't ignoring Yoda's question. Quite the contrary, I was trying to get to the *real* question, if there was one. To be honest, at first, I wasn't sure what it was that he was talking about other than what *sounded* like a simple talking point.

No I don't listen to Olberman or Maddow. To give you a little background on myself, so that you know where *I'm* coming from, for years I used to buy 3 papers a day. The leftist Boston Globe, the rightist Boston Herald and the McPaper Digest USA Today (as a sort of 'index') to kind of 'average things out'. I'm more of libertarian in principle but a realist at heart. To take that ideal into a practical example, I don't believe that health care is something that should be run by the government *BUT* I can also see the handwriting on the wall. I'm the kind of person who tries to think things through for their consequences largely because that's part of what I do for a living in designing software systems (If we do THIS then what effect will if have later on?).

I believe that whirring sound you hear is Thomas Jefferson spinning like a lathe in his grave. It's my belief that he would be simultaneously amazed and horrified at what this country has become.

I do believe that government has specific functions and that one of those is the "level playing field". But by the same turn that means the government is the REFEREE, not the scorekeeper. It's their job to make sure we all play by the same rules. Not one set of rules for us and one for Halliburton, Citibank, BofA, Aetna, etc. (And I say that as an employee of a major defense contractor)

I went after Beck and Limbaugh for two reasons.

First, Beck was specifically mentioned. Secondly, I used to listen to Limbaugh on a daily basis and it saddens me to see what a parody of himself he has become. He's certainly not unique in being someone who believed his own press clippings.

I'm more than willing to discuss almost anything with almost anyone, but I prefer to leave the demagogues out of the discussion.

it breaks my heart to see what has happened to John McCain over the years. Living in New Hampshire, I had the opportunity to vote for him in our primary way back when. But the McCain I voted for back then is not the same McCain who ran last year. Not when I hear him talking about "Net Neutrality" as though he was Comcast's ventriloquism dummy. My best friend and I disagree on many things but both of us thought the greatest political tragedy of recent years was what happened to the great man that was John McCain circa 2000.

I keep waiting for the moment in history that will be as important to us as the fall of the Berlin Wall was to Germany. The moment that a viable third political party emerges from the corrupt ashes of the two existing parties - giving us a government that believes in the Jeffersonian ideals ("That which governs least, governs best") while keeping with the *stated* ideals of the Democrats concerning personal freedoms. In other words, I want the government out of my wallet AND my bedroom.

But, like I say, I can see the handwriting on the wall. I *am* a realist and I'm still hopeful.

I don't care if you call it Global Warming, Global Cooling, Climate change or "Fred The Insane Weatherman Takes Over"... We shouldn't be dumping as many greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere JUST ON GENERAL PRINCIPLE. We have the technology to go to cleaner and better fuels. But by the same token, don't ram a 'treaty' down our throats that gives countries like China and India a free ride!

Health care? We pay more and get less than any other country. Dear lord, if we really believe in competition, how can we, as a country, compete for the best citizens when all those other countries can take care of them better? As I've said elsewhere, working in a hospital was quite an education.

Now, those names that Bucco mentioned - I haven't had the time to look them all up, though some made the news already. I'm no fan of "La Raza" (and I'm Hispanic, though you wouldn't know it) or other groups that perpetuate victimhood. But it's not like questionable appointees are anything new. I mean, need I say more than than the likes of John Ashcroft or Harriette Miers.

It's because of the anonymity of the internet that I wrote all this. I don't like being totally anonymous. I stand behind what I say and try to keep an open mind about things when engaged in a civil debate. I've had my mind changed on several things over the past 30 years. I've gone from being liberal to conservative to some mashup of both with a streak of libertarianism mixed in.

And if you want to know what I think of our current news organizations, well.. To be honest, I find myself agreeing with Jon Stewart of The Daily Show on Comedy Central more often. He's savaged everybody from Fox to MSNBC to CNN repeatedly. The latest being the fact that you have all these 24/7 news organizations out there and they still let 'spokespersons' get away with making outlandish claims and then say "sorry we don't have time to explore that". THEY'RE ON 24/7 - HOW MUCH MORE TIME COULD THEY POSSIBLY NEED???? And they cut away for DOG SHOWS? You'll notice that CNN no longer uses as their slogan "the world's most important network". No, they have YOU call in to say what YOU think when we're supposed to be tuning into THEM to find out what's going on!

Argh.. I'm ranting. Ever since news went from being it's own separate entity for a network to being under the "entertainment" umbrella in the 1980s, it's been all downhill.

The local channels are no better.

"How your choices at the grocery store could be killing you - tonight at 11". great. What if I'm going to the store at 8?

"Is there a hidden poison in your refrigerator? Find out at 11." Come on, I have to be UP at 5:30AM!!!

I stand corrected. It's Cronkite who's spinning like a lathe in his grave.

BO's "wrecking crew"?

Tell me. If the administration had let GM fail and go into Chapter 7, putting hundreds of thousands of employees out of work with a ripple effect that nobody could accurately forecast, what would you have said then?

The bank bailouts? Remember - BUSH was in charge when that was signed in. Also remember that THEY were the ones arguing for deregulation that paved the way for these derivatives.

Now, what I *can* agree with you on are the facts that are plain as day. Tax revenues being down and expenditures being way up. But deficit spending in a recessionary cycle is nothing new. It's just that our economy has never been this big before so the numbers are larger than ever.

But if you're thinking about that, let me ask you - and I mean this sincerely - where were you when the surplus that Bush inherited turned into the largest deficit in history (at the time)? Were you singing the same tune? And, let's be honest, if we never went into Iraq, there's a LOT of money that would still be in this country.

Obama inherited a godawful mess. Personally I don't think he can pull us all the way out. But McCain's campaign promises of "more of the same" would have been, I honestly believe, much worse.

If we HAVE to have all this government spending to buy votes, I'd rather see it spent on fixing our highways, upgrading our electrical grid, grants for new energy research, high-speed rail - INFRASTRUCTURE - since that's one of the things that made us so prosperous in the past.

Originally Posted by djplong

BO's "wrecking crew"?

Tell me. If the administration had let GM fail and go into Chapter 7, putting hundreds of thousands of employees out of work with a ripple effect that nobody could accurately forecast, what would you have said then?

The bank bailouts? Remember - BUSH was in charge when that was signed in. Also remember that THEY were the ones arguing for deregulation that paved the way for these derivatives.

Now, what I *can* agree with you on are the facts that are plain as day. Tax revenues being down and expenditures being way up. But deficit spending in a recessionary cycle is nothing new. It's just that our economy has never been this big before so the numbers are larger than ever.

But if you're thinking about that, let me ask you - and I mean this sincerely - where were you when the surplus that Bush inherited turned into the largest deficit in history (at the time)? Were you singing the same tune? And, let's be honest, if we never went into Iraq, there's a LOT of money that would still be in this country.

Obama inherited a godawful mess. Personally I don't think he can pull us all the way out. But McCain's campaign promises of "more of the same" would have been, I honestly believe, much worse.

If we HAVE to have all this government spending to buy votes, I'd rather see it spent on fixing our highways, upgrading our electrical grid, grants for new energy research, high-speed rail - INFRASTRUCTURE - since that's one of the things that made us so prosperous in the past.

This gives me an opportunity to say a few things....

First the TARP money (or the first part) was given during the Bush administration and that is correct, with Obama's blessing if you recall, AND it is credited as THE single saviour of our economics at the time and I would doubt you could find an economist that would disagree with that. Unlilke the so called "stimulus bill" which was about 70% pork.

Second, you mention the Bush spending and you are correct. This is an opportunity to point out to all those folks who recently discovered Fox news that that cable channel called him on his spending on a more regular basis than MSNBC or CNN. MSNBC focused more on the personal attacks.

Thus in answer to your question, most folks were aware and yelling about the Bush spending on both sides (of course not in congress because as we see now you just do not ever criticize the President in your party).

PS: You make the assumption that allowing GM to go bankrupt would have cost "hundreds of thousands of employees out of work" which I seriously doubt !

Originally Posted by billethkid

instead of the usual rock throwing....both parties.

As far as who said what and their character....it is so easy to google and research.....like the Van Jones issue. No matter who brought him to the light of day.....just google his name and see what is written about him.....as an example.

The keyboard is much like the CB of days of old. Those who would not say boo in a quorum.....achieve verbose catharsis in anonymity.....and we are for the most part all anonomous here.....eh?

btk

It was put forth as hypothetical. What if it were true? Would it matter.

Yoda

Originally Posted by dklassen

So if BO and his recking crew are not trying to dismantle our free market system aka America, why would they want to take over car companies, financial institutions, drive health insurance companies out of business, add trillions and trillions of debt, not care about job creation, put programs in place (cap-n-tax) and others that will basically drive families to bankruptcy? The list goes on and on.

None of his actions create any jobs but in fact are job killers. Tax revenues to the governments are dropping like a rock and at the same time government spending is skyrocketing to levels never seen our our history.

Forget about Glenn Beck or any other messenger you happen to hate. BO's actions are as plain as day. Any rational common sense thinking person can't come to any other conclusion.

You are falling into the liberal trap. You are arguing with them as to whether he is or not trying to dismantle the free market system. They will argue longer and louder than you can. They will not however answer the question of "If it were true, would it matter?"

Yoda

Originally Posted by djplong

Bucco: *Thank* you. And I'm not being facetious or sarcastic. It always helps a *debate* when you know where the other person is coming from.

Now, I wasn't ignoring Yoda's question. Quite the contrary, I was trying to get to the *real* question, if there was one. To be honest, at first, I wasn't sure what it was that he was talking about other than what *sounded* like a simple talking point.

No I don't listen to Olberman or Maddow. To give you a little background on myself, so that you know where *I'm* coming from, for years I used to buy 3 papers a day. The leftist Boston Globe, the rightist Boston Herald and the McPaper Digest USA Today (as a sort of 'index') to kind of 'average things out'. I'm more of libertarian in principle but a realist at heart. To take that ideal into a practical example, I don't believe that health care is something that should be run by the government *BUT* I can also see the handwriting on the wall. I'm the kind of person who tries to think things through for their consequences largely because that's part of what I do for a living in designing software systems (If we do THIS then what effect will if have later on?).

I believe that whirring sound you hear is Thomas Jefferson spinning like a lathe in his grave. It's my belief that he would be simultaneously amazed and horrified at what this country has become.

I do believe that government has specific functions and that one of those is the "level playing field". But by the same turn that means the government is the REFEREE, not the scorekeeper. It's their job to make sure we all play by the same rules. Not one set of rules for us and one for Halliburton, Citibank, BofA, Aetna, etc. (And I say that as an employee of a major defense contractor)

I went after Beck and Limbaugh for two reasons.

First, Beck was specifically mentioned. Secondly, I used to listen to Limbaugh on a daily basis and it saddens me to see what a parody of himself he has become. He's certainly not unique in being someone who believed his own press clippings.

I'm more than willing to discuss almost anything with almost anyone, but I prefer to leave the demagogues out of the discussion.

it breaks my heart to see what has happened to John McCain over the years. Living in New Hampshire, I had the opportunity to vote for him in our primary way back when. But the McCain I voted for back then is not the same McCain who ran last year. Not when I hear him talking about "Net Neutrality" as though he was Comcast's ventriloquism dummy. My best friend and I disagree on many things but both of us thought the greatest political tragedy of recent years was what happened to the great man that was John McCain circa 2000.

I keep waiting for the moment in history that will be as important to us as the fall of the Berlin Wall was to Germany. The moment that a viable third political party emerges from the corrupt ashes of the two existing parties - giving us a government that believes in the Jeffersonian ideals ("That which governs least, governs best") while keeping with the *stated* ideals of the Democrats concerning personal freedoms. In other words, I want the government out of my wallet AND my bedroom.

But, like I say, I can see the handwriting on the wall. I *am* a realist and I'm still hopeful.

I don't care if you call it Global Warming, Global Cooling, Climate change or "Fred The Insane Weatherman Takes Over"... We shouldn't be dumping as many greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere JUST ON GENERAL PRINCIPLE. We have the technology to go to cleaner and better fuels. But by the same token, don't ram a 'treaty' down our throats that gives countries like China and India a free ride!

Health care? We pay more and get less than any other country. Dear lord, if we really believe in competition, how can we, as a country, compete for the best citizens when all those other countries can take care of them better? As I've said elsewhere, working in a hospital was quite an education.

Now, those names that Bucco mentioned - I haven't had the time to look them all up, though some made the news already. I'm no fan of "La Raza" (and I'm Hispanic, though you wouldn't know it) or other groups that perpetuate victimhood. But it's not like questionable appointees are anything new. I mean, need I say more than than the likes of John Ashcroft or Harriette Miers.

It's because of the anonymity of the internet that I wrote all this. I don't like being totally anonymous. I stand behind what I say and try to keep an open mind about things when engaged in a civil debate. I've had my mind changed on several things over the past 30 years. I've gone from being liberal to conservative to some mashup of both with a streak of libertarianism mixed in.

And if you want to know what I think of our current news organizations, well.. To be honest, I find myself agreeing with Jon Stewart of The Daily Show on Comedy Central more often. He's savaged everybody from Fox to MSNBC to CNN repeatedly. The latest being the fact that you have all these 24/7 news organizations out there and they still let 'spokespersons' get away with making outlandish claims and then say "sorry we don't have time to explore that". THEY'RE ON 24/7 - HOW MUCH MORE TIME COULD THEY POSSIBLY NEED???? And they cut away for DOG SHOWS? You'll notice that CNN no longer uses as their slogan "the world's most important network". No, they have YOU call in to say what YOU think when we're supposed to be tuning into THEM to find out what's going on!

Argh.. I'm ranting. Ever since news went from being it's own separate entity for a network to being under the "entertainment" umbrella in the 1980s, it's been all downhill.

The local channels are no better.

"How your choices at the grocery store could be killing you - tonight at 11". great. What if I'm going to the store at 8?

"Is there a hidden poison in your refrigerator? Find out at 11." Come on, I have to be UP at 5:30AM!!!

I stand corrected. It's Cronkite who's spinning like a lathe in his grave.

You said a lot but a simple yes or no to the question was all I was looking for.

Yoda

Your question doesn't lend itself to a "yes or no" answer. Dividing people up into simpe "fer us" and "agin' us" camps does nothing. Politics is FAR more subtle than that. It's like the classic "When did you stop beating your wife" question.

I refuse to be pidgeon-holed into a camp with a one-word answer to a vague question.

If I simply say "yes" or "no", then I'm giving an inaccurate representation of myself. I do not fall in line with the Tea Party or the Obama adorers.

Yoda, the answer is YES!!!! Read this morning's column by Thomas Sowell. It tells about the people Obama has surrounding him. He's the one who said, " See who I surround myself with." Well we have and I for one am not happy with his selections, for advisers.

Originally Posted by Sally Jo

Yoda, the answer is YES!!!! Read this morning's column by Thomas Sowell. It tells about the people Obama has surrounding him. He's the one who said, " See who I surround myself with." Well we have and I for one am not happy with his selections, for advisers.

Thank you for a straight answer.

Yoda

[QUOTE=djplong;231081]My answer is "consider the source".

There's a famous tape of Glen Beck contradicting himself in 70 seconds where he says Obama is racist and hates white people, then says he isn't.

[QUOTE]

If you had actually watched this segment, you may have had a different perspective. Hmmm, perhaps not.

Yoda

Originally Posted by chelsea24

OMG! You ask for an honest debate and then you bring up something as ridiculous as this!

Chels, What is not honest about the question? I did not ask to debate. I asked for an opinion based on hypothetical circumstances.

Yoda

Originally Posted by Yoda

If you had actually watched this segment, you may have had a different perspective. Hmmm, perhaps not.

Yoda

Well, considering where I saw it they said "we'll play the entire segment, with space before and after so that you can see this is NOT anything we did with editing".

It tells me that Beck, for whatever reason, can't be taken seriously. If he's not on a script, then he can't remember what he's saying one minute (literally) to the next. If he WAS on a script (unlikely since this was a panel discussion) then he or his writers are lousy at their job.

Mind you, I don't think Obama was the best choice for the job. I honestly believe that Obama won because McCain said he would deliver more of the same and the people had a VERY bad feeling about that. I won't go into the problems that Sarah Palin brought into the mix (and I initially thought she was a brilliant choice until I learned more about her).

What did you learn about Sarah Palin?

To make a long story short, I learned she was window dressing.

Governor of Alaska is not like Governor of New York or California. Alaska is a welfare state due to oil revenues. Every resident gets a check, funded by the royalties the oil companies pay to the state. It has to be the easiest of all 50 states to govern. It's not like she's ever had to make a tough budget decision.

I saw interviews with the mayor of Wasilla. They don't even have their own police force. they don't pay for their schools (the state does that). When the mayor was asked what a city worker does, she repliued "well, they show up on Tuesdays for their paychecks". Granted that was in jest, but the mayor of Wasilla doesn't do much of anything.

That lack of experience is NOT where I want the person who would be a heartbeat away from the Presidency (especially given McCain's health issues).

Whether or not I agreed with her positions on various issues, she just was NOT ready for prime time. I mean, if you can't handle Katie Couric, how are you going to handle the White House Press Corps?

It was hard to tell what digs against her were real and which ones were made up, I'll grant you that.

But now she resigned from her position - and then actually said she was NOT quitting! It's like a whole new version of Newspeak from Planet Palin. She said she was pressing on the fight! What fight? From where? And how? It was all rhetoric and no substance - not that that is anything new or unique coming from a politician.

In truth, I thought she would finish out her term and then try for a more national office, like Senator or something like that. But she quit and has virtually vanished. Time will tell if any of the corruption allegations will have any traction.

I didn't give a damn about any of the allegations as to whether or not her kid was hers or Bristol's or any of that tabloid stuff.