MERGED: The Politics Thread

[Siria]

And so the rich get richer. Think they'll suddenly rain jobs down upon us?

They'll rain something on us. And for bonus points, it may actually be golden.

[SwitcherX]

how do you know this is not copypasta?

 

[Palomine]

Liberals go last.

Q-"Since you got us into this mess"-BE

Congrats Q, you've said so many unbelievably ignorant things here, but that's a new personal best for you. If making foolish pronouncements were an aphrodisiac, you'd be chin deep in pussy. What a shame for you that it isn't.

[pedonbio]

let's hope for the good of america cocky attitudes like jj's on the right persist and they get lazy in heading to the polls.  most of them already figure theyve got bigger gains than 94 locked up.  no doubt the teatards on the right can yell the loudest, but i think they might be in for a surprise.

That's interesting, because I heard almost exactly the same thing from a Republican friend who winced when Boner started talking about a "change of direction". My friend, who is one of those nameless GOP operatives, is of the opinion that they got lucky, the Democrats got unlucky, and anybody who acts like it was anything but luck is going to be in trouble.  

[pedonbio]

So do these results mean that America is populated by a majority of JJ's and Q_BE's?

Probably not. This was a pure turnout election--wins and losses simply depended on who bothered to vote. When you get voter percentages, it means the number of people registered to vote who actually vote. About half of those eligible are not registered at any given time. In the U.S. you can usually predict the outcome if you know the turnout percentage: Below 60%, Republicans win; 60-70% toss-up; over 70%, Democratic sweep.

There is another historic pattern: How California voted now is how the U.S. will vote in 2020. Republicans used to brag about that pattern when Reagan was governor. They're very quiet about it now. A big part of it is culture--West Coast culture leads U.S. culture by about ten years.  

Pal adds: that's interesting... and seems more or less true, at least on social issues and such. Of course, there are undoubtedly pockets of America that will be insisting on Creationism in textbooks 50 years hence. Also, the left coast strikes me as at least 10 years behind most of western Europe in quite a few ways too. BTW, in terms of CA vs. the rest of the States, a proposition to allow marijuana for non-medical use comes up now and then... and anyone who doesn't think it'll pass (probably sooner than later is fooling themselves). Also, the prop to roll back carbon output limits was defeated, despite huge financing in favor of the rollback from a couple of Texas oil companies... I can see other states eventually showing similar longer-term thinking at some point... at least those that aren't busy putting "Evolution is just one of many theories" stickers on 5th grade schoolbooks.

[gOOber]

Why would California elect such an old guy governor?

[CarlTL]

Liberals go last.

Q-"Since you got us into this mess"-BE

Quiet Q_BE, you're still in college.

[Real]

===========================================

Glad to see you got it right.  Wealth has never trickled UP to the best of my knowledge unless you steal it from those who make money and then give it to bums who are too lazy to earn it.

Trickle Down is alive and well, as always.  

the buying power of the middle class and not the trickle down from the rich created the american economic empire.  fact, period.  

but your assertion that wealth has never trickled up to your knowledge, doesnt surprise me.  you never struck me as either very smart or informed.

you are nothing more than a useful idiot for corporatist interests.  americans will continue to catch the trickle alright, while the hemmorage into mexico and asia continues where people can "earn" at a much more advantageous rate for the greedy.

all due respect to naive notions about creating jobs and hoping "fellow americans  work hard" that's just not reality.  its like pretending captial punishment is a deterrent or teaching kids abstinence over prophylactics leads to anything but more stds.  people know it's not true, but it's been ingrained as a warped value to them at this point.  

sadly archaic posturing trumps common sense on the right, just like with most issues.

id ask for an argument but those are facts a dimwit like you could not counter, so move on to your next copy paste or just grab one from the obama thread.

americans asked for it, but that wont stop them from being angry and indignant when conservatives tank the country again.  like they had nothing to do with it..

[pedonbio]

Why would California elect such an old guy governor?

'Cuz who else will bang Australian country singer girls?

[pedonbio]

Advice to John Boner:

Drunk, stupid, and tangerine is not a great way to get what you want.

[JJ]

 state of the Democrat Party in America, circa 2010............



jackass backwards

[Shara]

JJ, there are poor losers -- and there are poor winners.

You won! Now please shut the fuck up. I do not look forward to two years of you jumping up and down shouting, "Nyah, nyah, nyah!"

you know it's gonna happen

[JJ]

JJ, there are poor losers -- and there are poor winners.

You won! Now please shut the fuck up. I do not look forward to two years of you jumping up and down shouting, "Nyah, nyah, nyah!"

--------------------------------------------------------
Won't happen.  You won't find me jumping up and down doing the Nyah thing.

You also won't find me telling somebody to shut the fuck up?

Nice language.   Talk about poor losers?  



That's as bad as Palomine, (who's supposed to set an example around here) completely losing it and calling me ignorant, dumb, stupid and whatever else he could think of at the time, all because I "did not wake up and see the light" HIS way!  What arrogance!


I challenge you to go back and find any post I've done where I told someone they were an idiot and to shut the fuck up?

Is this how Liberals operate?   Don't do as I do?  Do as I say?
===============================================


By the way.................................
I see you really took the advice well on how to find a job?  

Still sitting at home waiting for Obama to call with a job offer?  
=============================================



I said it...........................

The overwhelming repudiation of the Obama administration’s failing policies sends a clear message to the world that the American people will not accept the decline of the world’s most powerful nation.

[Q_BE]

JJ, there are poor losers -- and there are poor winners.

You won! Now please shut the fuck up. I do not look forward to two years of you jumping up and down shouting, "Nyah, nyah, nyah!"

And yet, that's precisely what you would be doing in kind if the election hadn't turned out the way we had expected…

…as far as ignorant pronouncements go, I know what I said, and I'd say it again…liberals and liberal policies got us into this mess—and conservatives and conservatism will get us out. The keys will be stripping the sectors who are bankrupting us of the power to do so—and that means chopping into the voting blocks of the unions, the black electorate at large, and of course, the burgeoning Hispanic vote. California, New York, and other intractably liberal enclaves are going to go bankrupt before all that happens, and I wistfully anticipate the day coming when the feds turn to them while they are begging for bailouts and the feds say "No more." Of course, that will depend on whether they go overboard before/after Barack Obama is president.

Otherwise, we are not going to devolve culturally into the liberal morass because a vast majority of Americans are instinctually conservative—no matter how they actually vote—because they are Americans first, and policy partisans second, and the American people genuinely appreciate the greatness of the nation in which we live, contrary to those on the Left who continually drag us down with their pathetic protestations. I should think with more education, more information, and more legitimate choices, Americans, particularly minorities, will learn that liberal Democratic policies are holding them, their liberal cities, and their liberal states back, and finally emerge from the Democratic plantation they've been farming monolithically for nearly a century. Case in point, Obama and liberals preach endlessly about government transparency, and yet who has the LEAST transparent government in history? Obama and all his liberal cronies, many of whom got neatly booted on their arses on November the 2nd.

America will survive this liberal insanity as they have survived other long battles with various other enemies of the state—communism, terrorism, and all sorts of economic turmoil. This nation will succeed because we are conditioned to do nothing else—and nobody, not anybody, is going to tell us we can't govern ourselves better than any number of government bureaucrats, and this election proves it out.

As it stands, I'm not stopping, and I'm not going away post-2010-election: I'm not quitting until every American agrees with me, and I figure there are at least a few here who would rather gouge off their genitalia than see the light of day because they are so accustomed to their own dark mental bubbles.

Q-BE out.

[rtpoe]

JJ:

You said that someone out of work can go get a job at WalMart or McDonalds.

Do you have any idea how much those jobs pay? I really, really doubt it. From your post, it's implied that the person can get an entry-level job at their local McDonalds or Wal-Mart. Guess what... the median hourly wage for a *manager* is under $10! Put in a whopping 60 hours a week, and you'll still be earning only $30K a year. Try raising a family on that, or having any sort of life. Wal-Mart may pay a little better, but you have to get hired, first! And if they get hundreds of applications for every position (think how easy it is to submit a resume/application on-line these days), what do you think your odds are?

How many hours a week would you, JJ, have to work as a McDonald's manager to match your current salary? I'd have to work about 80 hours....

Sure, there may be plenty of jobs out there. But they aren't at anywhere near the pay levels of the people who need them!

And with regards to your "trickle-down" comment, if it's really "alive and well", then why, by every measure, study, and report I've found, has the income disparity between the rich and everyone else in America been INCREASING over the last 30 years (coincidentally, since Saint Reagan first presented us with "trickle-down economics")?

[Q_BE]

No, not at all. And don't tell me what I would say.
This is self-evidently false. There apparently were not two wars, a huge debt, housing and banking crisis, and a recession before Obama took office?

And they were all government policies, supported by Democrats (even the wars, initially). The great god of liberalism, government gave us all these woes (thank you Barney Frank and Chris Dodd ), and it will take many years of concerted conservative effort to peel back all the archaic layers of government bureaucracy that have produced the stifiling—and seemingly intractable, according to Obama's budgets—spending, deficits, and debt.

What's it going to take before enough government is enough? The government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take it all away…

Q-"Take it to the Fed"-BE

[JJ]

JJ:

You said that someone out of work can go get a job at WalMart or McDonalds.

Do you have any idea how much those jobs pay? I really, really doubt it. From your post, it's implied that the person can get an entry-level job at their local McDonalds or Wal-Mart. Guess what... the median hourly wage for a *manager* is under $10! Put in a whopping 60 hours a week, and you'll still be earning only $30K a year. Try raising a family on that, or having any sort of life. Wal-Mart may pay a little better, but you have to get hired, first! And if they get hundreds of applications for every position (think how easy it is to submit a resume/application on-line these days), what do you think your odds are?

How many hours a week would you, JJ, have to work as a McDonald's manager to match your current salary? I'd have to work about 80 hours....

Sure, there may be plenty of jobs out there. But they aren't at anywhere near the pay levels of the people who need them!

And with regards to your "trickle-down" comment, if it's really "alive and well", then why, by every measure, study, and report I've found, has the income disparity between the rich and everyone else in America been INCREASING over the last 30 years (coincidentally, since Saint Reagan first presented us with "trickle-down economics")?

=========================================

Just listen to yourself wail?

Boo Hoo Hoo, I can't get a job paying me $500.oo an hour, sitting on my arse.
McDonalds doesn't pay enough.

This IS the attitude that got people like Barack Obama elected.  Oh Please Mr. Obama, get me a job.

I'm too dumb to figure out how to get a job and I must have $30,000K a year!

Boo Hoo Hoo.   




It's hopeless.

[JJ]

Libertarian Neal Boortz says..............


So ... We now have a House solidly under the control of the Republicans. As things stand now the Democrats will have a three seat advantage in the Senate. I'm not upset with this scenario. I've been wondering aloud for weeks what the effect might be on 2012 if the Republicans had both the House and the Senate ... with Obama standing alone as the champion of the Left at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It would be a classic "me vs. them" and would be so easy to spin in to an "Obama as besieged underdog" scenario.

[Shara]

the best part would be to find out JJ is living on wellfare. Q_BE doesn't have a job

[3deroticer]

I have to bring back reality, but it is not a practice of most fast food place to promote employee from within, and the average employee makes about 12,000 per year or less, because it is not a habit for fast food place to hire anyone fulltime, because of benefit. Only those that work more than 30 hours a week get benefit.

[3deroticer]

Right Wing Tavern looks at the 2010 election...............................

I am actually happy with this!
All of the blue dog Democrats got wipe out in the midterm, and now we wont appear as weak, and the burden now fall on Republican to get anything done, forcing their hands for them to come up with something or appear to be weak. I have always thought it would be better to lose the house and have willing partner on your side than to have wolves in sheep clothing in order to win the house.

[Real]

and that's just the thing.  in spite of clear facts, the right is just going to up and say they had nothing to do with tanking the country's economy.  that's clearly their best m.o.

just say "liberalism got us into this mess" because 8 years of bush doesnt count, just like military spending.  just say that "socialism" abounds when its the middle class who suffer the lowered median income the gop created and the rich are richer than ever.  just say everyone will be fine working at wal-mart while your "job creators" send real jobs to mexico and asia.  just say cutting taxes and going back to bush policies that lost jobs and lowered the median income is "real america".

like i said, when it comes to the right truth doesnt matter.  their corporatist idolatry is ingrained as a warped value, just like their "for dummies" pick and choose brand of american christianity.

and when the economy tanks, heathcare costs double again, the median income goes down and the rich stay richer than ever before "communism", "socialism" and "marxism" will be the culprit.  easier to erroniously throw around words that you dont have the faintest clue of the definition of.

[Real]

boner & co who have promised to magically balance the budget while giving their millionaire friends billions. yet of course, they refuse to tell anyone what hundreds of billions they are going to slash.

they wont, but to the end i described above, they will eviscerate education.  an investment in less educated voters, the future for the gop.  watch.  

oh and sorry for the double post instead of edit.  but if jj can spam one for each of his copy pasted links...

[Real]

why not?  

[pedonbio]

boner & co who have promised to magically balance the budget while giving their millionaire friends billions. yet of course, they refuse to tell anyone what hundreds of billions they are going to slash.

they wont, but to the end i described above, they will eviscerate education.  an investment in less educated voters, the future for the gop.  watch.  

oh and sorry for the double post instead of edit.  but if jj can spam one for each of his copy pasted links...

In major part it depends on whether Boner is serious about helping the country or not. There is one glaring boondoggle that (so far) Secretary Gates is the only one brave enough to talk about: The Marine Corps. Liberals, conservatives, and everyone else knows that it is time that waste of money was closed down. The U.S. "needs" about 1,000 Marines to guard embassies around the world. Every other function they perform can be done better and cheaper by another armed force.

The sole unique function of the Marines has been amphibious landings under fire. That used to be a common and necessary military function. The last time we did one was 1951 at Inchon. For the last 59 years, and into the foreseeable future, there has been and will be no need.

The sole reason we still have this vestigal force is precisely because people like Boner don't have the courage to cut real government waste.

[pedonbio]

  Boner family reunion:

[pedonbio]

Right Wing Tavern? Here's one of your shitfaced customers:

[pedonbio]

I am actually happy with this!
All of the blue dog Democrats got wipe out in the midterm, and now we wont appear as weak, and the burden now fall on Republican to get anything done, forcing their hands for them to come up with something or appear to be weak. I have always thought it would be better to lose the house and have willing partner on your side than to have wolves in sheep clothing in order to win the house.

I'll miss Alan Grayson, but he'll be writing for Huffington Post, so he'll still be around until we can get him back in office.

By the way, 3d, you may not be old enough to remember this, but there is a very old cultural tradition that Pal and I discussed in another thread--However the vote goes in California, that's how the vote will go in the rest of the country ten years later. When Reagan was elected governor of California, the Republicans really made a big deal out of it. I am tempted to quote Churchill's observation to Hitler: "Make the most of these burning midnights, for they are the only victory you shall have."

[pedonbio]

Libertarian Neal Boortz says..............


So ... We now have a House solidly under the control of the Republicans. As things stand now the Democrats will have a three seat advantage in the Senate. I'm not upset with this scenario. I've been wondering aloud for weeks what the effect might be on 2012 if the Republicans had both the House and the Senate ... with Obama standing alone as the champion of the Left at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It would be a classic "me vs. them" and would be so easy to spin in to an "Obama as besieged underdog" scenario.

Typical of a libertarian to ignore history. In the last century three presidents lost the House in their first off-year election --Truman, Eisenhower, and Clinton-- and all three were re-elected.

[gOOber]

Hopefully now we can get back to the way things were under Reagan.

[MrsPacman1]

I am actually happy with this!
All of the blue dog Democrats got wipe out in the midterm, and now we wont appear as weak, and the burden now fall on Republican to get anything done, forcing their hands for them to come up with something or appear to be weak. I have always thought it would be better to lose the house and have willing partner on your side than to have wolves in sheep clothing in order to win the house.

I partially agree with this. Pacman fell into the "I'm not going to vote because I don't like any of the candidates" category. I didn't agree with that, but I respect his views on the subject. What I do agree with, is moderate dems screwed themselves IMO. I am terribly bummed about losing the progressives we did...especially Russ Feingold. However, the republicans and the...er...other republicans aren't about to bridge the grand canyon sized gap between the aisles...let alone their own party, so why bother having the "compromisers" even there? It's time the Democratic Party gets their shit together and steps up to the plate. When they do, they'll have the support they had when we elected Obama into office.

Mrs*no matter what I will always stand behind them - I'm just saying*Pacman

[MrsPacman1]

I'll miss Alan Grayson, but he'll be writing for Huffington Post, so he'll still be around until we can get him back in office.

I hear you. I'm hoping Russ starts looking toward the presidential primaries. It's time he made his bid.


Mrs*when I dream...I dream BIG*Pacman

[3deroticer]

MsPacman, I'm glad you brought this up. We lost both Grayson and Fiengold, and they were 3 of the loudest heard in DC, and got pummeled with corporate and foreign contribution for their loss.

What happen in Oregon was a miracle, as Kizthaber by some consider to be the father of national health care. He tried to implement health care in Oregon like no other states, Hawaii pick up on it and did quite well. Kitzhaber stance on education and health care was a huge threat to the Republican and they laid waste outspending Kizthaber, 7 to one on the campaign and he still won by a 12,000 vote lead. The last time a vote was that narrow was 50 years ago, but with equal funding for the election. The question I have is will future election with unlimited undisclosed spending of corporation versus the common people have any bearing of the outcome of the election? Will people revolt at the idea of being bought rather then using reasonable persuasion of beneficial ideals?

[Siliconex]

Hope neocons are coming back. Iran is THE problem
at this time...!

[Real]

the characterization that this is a deep rebuke of obama's policy may not be as spot on as conservatives in celebratory euphoria might have considered.  seems the democrats who chose to stand with the party of no were main targets of the electoral purge:


The sad tale of the Democrats who hated the unemployed
Most of them are now, ironically, jobless
By Alex Pareene
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/11/03/antiunemployment_dems_unemployed