Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PTTG??]

...Unlike most people, I really do think there are a lot of good Democrats as well as a lot of good Republicans in Congress...

Finally, a statement everyone can disagree with!

[Flying Dice]

And, at least the House passed budgets. The Senate hasn't for three years even though they could have passed one with 51 votes.

So what you're saying is that the Senate should pass proposals for the sake of passing proposals, rather than because the proposals are workable ideas? See, as much as I'd like to go ahead and lump both parties into a single group labelled "assholes", I really can't. The Democrats are spineless moderates who almost never muster the will to do anything of significance. That's bad, sure. But not as bad as being willing to completely block the political process for years with asinine proposals and then blame their political opponents for not "compromising" by meekly accepting their demands.

I also find it sort of amusing that you're complaining about people not backing their statements up with well-documented evidence when all you've posted is a link to an obviously biased media outlet while pumping out the party line as hard as you can. Pot, kettle, etc.

...Unlike most people, I really do think there are a lot of good Democrats as well as a lot of good Republicans in Congress...

Finally, a statement everyone can disagree with!

Heh. They're good at being political tools (in every sense of the word), I'll give them that much.

[Shinotsa]

Despite how common it is in everyday speech, when you resort to making wide generalizations about a specific group in a serious argument, you've just lost all your credibility. There are intelligent people on every side of an argument (even if a side is wrong, a prime example being the scientific process) and saying that you can spot an X because they do Y is tantamount to outdated stereotypes vilifying the poor or minority groups. I rarely post serious comments that are off-topic and I very much apologize for doing so, but I just have to say that if you are going to dismiss the other side of an argument as below you then you may as well stop arguing your point.

Anyhow, on the topic of whether or not sides get things done, how many filibusters have their been for each party in the past decade? Being a college student I mainly hear about Republican filibusters, but I feel that there must have been democrats stonewalling legislation as well.

[Zangi]

Citations, though, are a good thing. Everyone should use them.

Keep in mind that some citations are worth more facepalms then others.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I'm a conservative.

Dun dun DUUUUNNNN.

_{I'm so sorry.}

Don't be, I enjoy being a socially-Liberal fiscally-Conservative American. Sorry for being mean, I'm just so damn tired of all the ideologues that come out of the woodworks around these times despite not knowing the subject matter at all [or from a view so narrowly focused on one side that you could call it uneducated].

[Kon]

Dear god, you're a moron. I'm a conservative. Quantify your previous horseshit and I'll consider you worth arguing with, all you're doing is spewing unverified, ridiculous statements and falling back to 'Oh wah, you're a mean Liberal!' when I don't agree with your hollow ideological rhetoric.

Tell me what was good about the House's 'budget' proposals, once again.

People ask me to qualify my statements, but I don't know which ones they are talking about. I don't mind discussing each issue.

You refer to me as "blowing hot air out of his ass for the sake of spewing more party patriotism out there." Which statement are you talking about?

As far as Republican budgets go, obviously they did not go far enough. Ryan's last budget, apparently, will take decades to balance the budget, yet it is called extreme by liberals. (Obama's budget never balances). If a budget increases spending by less than the baseline of around 8%, it is called a budget cut. If you were to increase spending by three times the inflation rate, the liberals would call it massive and irresponsible spending cuts that will throw the elderly out into the street, devastate education, and cause the death of babies. So, I am not defending the Republican budgets -- I am criticizing the Democrats for not even trying to pass a budget. The Republicans, though, obviously do not want to increase non-military spending nearly as much as Democrats do.

At least some Republicans are talking about addressing entitlements, such as gradually raising the retirement age, means testing, and moving young people toward a defined contribution plan rather tha a defined benefit plan.

I have never been a Republican. I am a liberatarian. I would like to see military spending held to no higher than the inflation rate, along with all discretionary spending. I would like to see us get rid of income taxes for individuals as well as for businesses. I would like to get rid of taxes on capital gains and dividends. All of these can be replaced by a national sales tax. I can give many reasons why this is the best way to collect taxes.

The bottom line is you are asking me to defend the Republican budgets despite my never having said I like them. I just pointed out that the House is passing budgets and the Senate is not. I was asking what people people wanted me to give proof of or expand upon. And you call me a moron. Dear god, what an ass you are.

[Mephansteras]

Citations, though, are a good thing. Everyone should use them.

Keep in mind that some citations are worth more facepalms then others.

Good point. I should amend that to citations from credible sources are a good thing and people should use them.

[Kon]

...
I also find it sort of amusing that you're complaining about people not backing their statements up with well-documented evidence when all you've posted is a link to an obviously biased media outlet while pumping out the party line as hard as you can. Pot, kettle, etc.

You don't get it. This isn't a Republican versus Democrat argument. It's not a liberal versus conservative argument. It is a well known fact. No one denies it being true.

[Leafsnail]

It's a "fact", but you're drawing very contestable conclusions from the fact.

[Aqizzar]

...
I also find it sort of amusing that you're complaining about people not backing their statements up with well-documented evidence when all you've posted is a link to an obviously biased media outlet while pumping out the party line as hard as you can. Pot, kettle, etc.

You don't get it. This isn't a Republican versus Democrat argument. It's not a liberal versus conservative argument. It is a well known fact. No one denies it being true.

Except that it ceases to be a "fact" worth anything when you take five seconds to learn about context.  Here's some points that have been hammered over and over again that you refuse to address.

One, Mitch McConnell saying his primary task as leader of the Republican party in the Senate was to prevent Obama from being reelected.

Two, passing bills through the House that the people voting for them know perfectly well will not survive the Senate is a meaningless gesture worthy of no respect.

Three, that Obama offered the Senate almost everything they wanted on a silver platter (see: giving them Bob Dole's health care plan and then amending it downward to their specifications) and still not getting a single Republican to cross the line.

Why I'm even entertaining this I don't know, because I hate coming back to my thread and seeing four new pages, because it's always a pointless argument.

[Kon]

Here is a a CNN article. Yes, it is written by a Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. But you can do your own research if you don't like mine. I'm just responding to those who are asking me for citations:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/29/opinion/johnson-budget/index.html

[Flying Dice]

...
I also find it sort of amusing that you're complaining about people not backing their statements up with well-documented evidence when all you've posted is a link to an obviously biased media outlet while pumping out the party line as hard as you can. Pot, kettle, etc.

You don't get it. This isn't a Republican versus Democrat argument. It's not a liberal versus conservative argument. It is a well known fact. No one denies it being true.

So you're claiming that because you say something, it becomes a "well known fact"? You're painting a complex issue as if it can be laid at the feet of a single man. Here's a rather interesting read on the subject.

Though honestly, something about your baseless rhetoric is setting off alarms in my head...

I am a liberatarian.

Ah, explains it. By the way, I can give "many reasons" for things too, if I have the freedom to lie my ass off and pretend I know exactly what I'm talking about. In any case, I tend to find debating damned near anything with a Randian objectivist to be something akin to debating philosophy with an unethical stone wall: the discussion goes nowhere and I come out of it with a massive headache and a vague sense of dirtiness.

Here is a a CNN article. Yes, it is written by a Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. But you can do your own research if you don't like mine. I'm just responding to those who are asking me for citations:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/29/opinion/johnson-budget/index.html

Wait. I might be wrong, but did you really just quote an interview with someone related to the Band of Six as an unbiased source? Ye gods, that's like talking to Nixon about Watergate and expecting the slimy bastard to give you straight answers.

[Sirus]

Aw, c'mon people. You're making Aqizzar cry D:

[Frumple]

Do... do Aqizzar tears taste good? Are they sufficiently delicious to warrant provoking them? You seem sufficiently close to see Aqi's crying, so I'd wager you're close enough to take a taste.

Do it, Sirus. Do it for science.

[mainiac]

As far as Republican budgets go, obviously they did not go far enough. Ryan's last budget, apparently, will take decades to balance the budget, yet it is called extreme by liberals. (Obama's budget never balances).

'

Just saying this doesn't make it true.  The budget experts like center for budget priorities overwhelmingly say that Obama is vastly better on the deficit.

Protip: the guy calling for tax cuts isn't balancing the budget.