Politics You pro-Trump, anti-govenment types are fools

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
tlongII said:
Now I'm not a republican...buuuut.... It's interesting to note that those "Texas Republicans" have a rainy day fund that is worth about $10 Billion in their coffers. Financially they are in much better shape than our liberal Oregon state government would be if facing a similar catastrophe.
Click to expand...
The vast resources transporting oil to refineries gives the Texans political advantages.
 
tlongII said:
Now I'm not a republican...buuuut.... It's interesting to note that those "Texas Republicans" have a rainy day fund that is worth about $10 Billion in their coffers. Financially they are in much better shape than our liberal Oregon state government would be if facing a similar catastrophe.
Click to expand...
If we were allowed to keep our fucking money in our coffers instead of having to give the citizens a cheque for $50 every year...
 
Stevenson said:
You are the problem. You are why people are dying in Houston.

Government has an important, legitimate function in society. But you fools want to shrink it. Good thing you don't live in Houston, where there is a severe lack of FEMA help because, like everything else the Trump Administration touches, FEMA has been trashed, underfunded, and can't save enough lives.

Starving the government by not funding and staffing it doesn't shrink government, it makes it dysfunctional. Do you not see that around you every day? We need a working government with a moral center. We have neither. We have the opposite. Today, it's floods, tomorrow it will be financial crimes., and North Korea, and a bubble bursting. We need judges. We need a functioning government. The anti-Semite Trump is like Sargent Schultz - he knows nothing, sees nothing,

"Drain the swamp." What a joke. Dive into the deep end is more like it at his government-subsided Washington Trump hotel. Please take your hypocritical, two-bit 'drain the swamp' theory, your repugnant, incompetent leader, and leave the rest of us who love what this country really is and know what it really stands for, we who want to take care of it, each other, and our sick planet and who feel the pull of America's historical role to do Tikkun Olam and let us get to work.

Drain the swamp. What a joke. You are heading this country to ruin. Take your Russian puppet president and deny reality amongst yourselves all you want. We all see the truth of this man now. Let us run our country. Where you're taking us is frightening.

And you know it too.
Click to expand...
 
tlongII said:
I doubt our state government would save the money anyway.
Click to expand...
Well we KNOW they aren't now, so no sense in complaining about them not doing something they literally aren't allowed to do.
 
EL PRESIDENTE said:
denounce the political views of your opponents.
Click to expand...
you mean like the entire world, half his cabinet and the vast majority of the population? nobody needs to be shy about denouncing Trump's inadequacies. We're americans.....there is no opponent unless someone wants us to continue with this team sport mentality....the hurricane thread was quickly filled with posts wishing all those there free of harm....this is not that thread. and this from the Trump voter who wanted to watch the world burn! That's a problem my friend...the sooner people stop identifying with partisan politics...the soon they become less influential.....Trump needs to lead America....not a small segment of America.
 
Well, at least I feel better now that I got that off my chest. :)

Now, I just have to stop @HCP from continuing to try and steal my basketball moniker and all will be well!
 
Denny Crane said:
hahahahah

good one.
Click to expand...

When is the last time the GOP ran the country in a fiscally conservative, positive manner? W. had both wars off the books and ran the economy off the rails. Obama saved him. Bill Clinton, as noted, created a surplus with a budget that 0 Republicans voted for. So that takes us back until at least 1992.

Facts are stubborn things Denny.

(On your mark, get set, cut and paste!!!!)
 
Stevenson said:
When is the last time the GOP ran the country in a fiscally conservative, positive manner? W. had both wars off the books and ran the economy off the rails. Obama saved him. Bill Clinton, as noted, created a surplus with a budget that 0 Republicans voted for. So that takes us back until at least 1992.

Facts are stubborn things Denny.

(On your mark, get set, cut and paste!!!!)
Click to expand...

Not to mention Medicare Part D that was put on the credit card....
 
I'm not really pro Trump so much as I was anti ANY Clinton or Bush. I'm anti government in a multitude of ways. Just not all.

So, I accept blame for a few cars getting flooded and maybe a house or two. That's it.
 
Stevenson said:
When is the last time the GOP ran the country in a fiscally conservative, positive manner? W. had both wars off the books and ran the economy off the rails. Obama saved him. Bill Clinton, as noted, created a surplus with a budget that 0 Republicans voted for. So that takes us back until at least 1992.

Facts are stubborn things Denny.

(On your mark, get set, cut and paste!!!!)
Click to expand...

I copy and paste those stubborn facts. I also research what I post exactly for the purpose of being factual.

You insist on making assertions that just aren't facts or factual. My sources are left wing, not from some conservative leaning sites. I bolded just one of your statements that simply is 100% incorrect. The senate voted 85-15 for the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, while the house voted 346-85 for it. "0 Republicans voted for," my ass.

If you want to continue to dispute Clinton only submitted a budget that would balance the budget in 2004, while the budget was balanced in 1998 - six years sooner than Clinton proposed, feel free to do so at your peril.

The economy was fine until 2007, right? What happened in 2006? (Pelosi/Reid control of congress). For all the blame you want to heap on W Bush, he warned of the dangers posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in most of his State of the Union Addresses, and his proposals (McCain's proposals, too), to protect us from what eventually did happen were rebuffed, opposed by Democrats who wanted people who normally would not qualify to own homes to own homes (a nice sentiment, but at massive risk).

If Obama did nothing at all, the economy would have gotten stronger faster, but that's a matter of opinion. The facts are that Obama's recovery was the weakest and slowest of any in modern history. He also left us with massive debt that our grandchildren will be paying off, money that will be squeezing out your favorite social programs in the budget (what would $400B in interest payments, so far this year alone, buy?)

Clinton's surplus was built on taxing peoples' life savings (capital gains), not their income. When the stock bubble burst, buh bye $7T in peoples' wealth. As bad as 2007/08 was, 2000 was damned close. The NASDAQ lost 78% of its value in 2000. While Fed Chairman Greenspan was warning of "irrational exuberance," Clinton was telling us all the economy was in the sweet spot. People paid capital gains taxes on that 78% that was lost in 1999 when their mutual funds showed massive gains (up to 100% even).

I know you're giving Clinton credit for Reagan's pro growth policies that lasted decades (with only GHW Bush's recession, and Clinton's dot bomb bubble in between), and you desperately want to give Clinton credit for Kasich's balanced budgets (all spending bills originate in the House).

In fact, while Kasich was writing the balanced budgets, Clinton was out on the road claiming we'd balance the budget in 7 years, or 8 years, or 10 years (depending on the crowd or day of the week - he had no clue).


From fivethirtyeight.com:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-bill-clinton-does-not-know-how-to-fix-the-economy/

The bursting of the tech bubble in 2000, and the subsequent recession, revealed that the 1990s boom was, at least to some degree, a mirage, the result of cheap money and, in then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s famous phrase, “irrational exuberance.” The recession that followed the tech bust, however, was relatively mild. If that were the worst consequence of the Clinton era, it might seem a small price to pay for a decade of solid growth.

But the Clinton boom, and even some specific Clinton policies, also helped sow the seeds for the far more severe Great Recession of the late 2000s. Mortgage-backed securities and subprime loans weren’t invented in the 1990s, but they expanded greatly during the period, part of a broader “financialization” of the U.S. economy that contributed directly to the severity of the Great Recession. Critics on the right argue Clinton-administration policies promoting increased lending to low-income and minority applicants contributed to the subsequent bubble; critics on the left, including Bernie Sanders, argue that Clinton’s deregulation of the banking industry paved the way for the crisis.

Bill Clinton deserves, at most, a small sliver of the blame for the financial crisis. But he probably doesn’t deserve much credit for the late-’90s boom, either.
​
Politifact. Note that the budget was balanced by 1998 or 1999.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ng-out-john-kasichs-claim-he-was-one-chief-a/

When the Clinton administration submitted a budget that would eliminate the deficit by 2004, Kasich was the first Republican to reject and call for a do-over. In a February op-ed, Kasich wrote that "it is not that difficult to cobble together a budget that could at least appear to be balanced within five years." But he said a balanced budget amendment would force leaders to deal honestly with every budget in the future.

"If the politicians know they must not only achieve a balanced budget but also must maintain a balanced budget, they will have no choice but to develop credible solutions and do so sooner rather than later," Kasich wrote.

No amendment emerged, but a bipartisan deal was struck by July, and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, sponsored by Kasich, had a clear path. Kasich was at Clinton’s side when the bill was signed into law. House Speaker Newt Gingrich said of Kasich, "More than any single man, he is responsible for balancing the budget."​

2003. NY Times (no friend to republicans).
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/b...ed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON SEPT. 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
​
factcheck.org, another left wing talking points site.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/who-caused-the-economic-crisis/

It’s true that key Democrats opposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which would have established a single, independent regulatory body with jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie – a move that the Government Accountability Office had recommended in a 2004 report. Current House Banking Committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts opposed legislation to reorganize oversight in 2000 (when Clinton was still president), 2003 and 2004, saying of the 2000 legislation that concern about Fannie and Freddie was "overblown." Just last summer, Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd called a Bush proposal for an independent agency to regulate the two entities "ill-advised."​
 
Last edited:
Stevenson, one thing you are wrong on. They are not anti government nor are they for small government.

True, they hate the "social safety net" - unemployment, social security, medicare, food aid for children and old people, home heating aid for seniors. They hate environmental and consumer protection. They hate anti-discrimination and equal pay laws. They really hate zoning restrictions (how is that freedom working for you, Houston?) And of course everyone, no matter how violent or deranged, has to have access to unlimited number and type of firearms.

But they are for really really big government.

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III plans to explode the prison population by strict enforcement of laws against marijuana use, including medical use, and instructed judges to impose the strictest sentences and most severe charges possible for all defendants. They LOVE the death penalty. And few things they love more than passing laws to restrict vaginas. Hundreds of laws to make it harder for women to get contraception, abortion, or even information. Laws requiring doctors to give patients false information. Laws providing funds to fake clinics that are nothing more than Christian proselytizing. They love police brutality, which Trump openly calls for. They really love having the government decides whose love has value and whose does not. They want to tell transgender people they can't serve in the military (and gays/lesbians as well). They LOVE voter suppression. Trump appointed a federal commission to make it as hard as possible for the "wrong" people (Black, Hispanic, students, poor people) to vote and more voter suppression laws have been introduced in 2017 than in 2015 and 2016 combined. They LOVE spending money on military. The US spends more than the next 9 countries combined but they want a big increase. Trump threatened military intervention against Venezuela, which has turmoil but has in no way threatened the U.S. They love passing laws making it harder to join unions. They love passing laws to take money from public schools and give it to Christian schools; the Sec. of "education" has said that is god's plan for the U.S. Scientists at EPA and other agencies have been ordered to censor their work and take out references to global warming.

And several states have passed or are considering laws that would make it legal to run down protesters. If Virginia had such a law, the murder of Heather Hayer would not have been a crime.
 
You aren't describing anti-government types, and certainly Libertarians.

Your argument is straw man, by the literal definition of the term.
 
crandc said:
Stevenson, one thing you are wrong on. They are not anti government nor are they for small government.

True, they hate the "social safety net" - unemployment, social security, medicare, food aid for children and old people, home heating aid for seniors. They hate environmental and consumer protection. They hate anti-discrimination and equal pay laws. They really hate zoning restrictions (how is that freedom working for you, Houston?) And of course everyone, no matter how violent or deranged, has to have access to unlimited number and type of firearms.

But they are for really really big government.

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III plans to explode the prison population by strict enforcement of laws against marijuana use, including medical use, and instructed judges to impose the strictest sentences and most severe charges possible for all defendants. They LOVE the death penalty. And few things they love more than passing laws to restrict vaginas. Hundreds of laws to make it harder for women to get contraception, abortion, or even information. Laws requiring doctors to give patients false information. Laws providing funds to fake clinics that are nothing more than Christian proselytizing. They love police brutality, which Trump openly calls for. They really love having the government decides whose love has value and whose does not. They want to tell transgender people they can't serve in the military (and gays/lesbians as well). They LOVE voter suppression. Trump appointed a federal commission to make it as hard as possible for the "wrong" people (Black, Hispanic, students, poor people) to vote and more voter suppression laws have been introduced in 2017 than in 2015 and 2016 combined. They LOVE spending money on military. The US spends more than the next 9 countries combined but they want a big increase. Trump threatened military intervention against Venezuela, which has turmoil but has in no way threatened the U.S. They love passing laws making it harder to join unions. They love passing laws to take money from public schools and give it to Christian schools; the Sec. of "education" has said that is god's plan for the U.S. Scientists at EPA and other agencies have been ordered to censor their work and take out references to global warming.

And several states have passed or are considering laws that would make it legal to run down protesters. If Virginia had such a law, the murder of Heather Hayer would not have been a crime.
Click to expand...
I'm for all of those things except the guns. I don't want gays or lesbians to have guns.
 
crandc said:
Stevenson, one thing you are wrong on. They are not anti government nor are they for small government.

True, they hate the "social safety net" - unemployment, social security, medicare, food aid for children and old people, home heating aid for seniors. They hate environmental and consumer protection. They hate anti-discrimination and equal pay laws. They really hate zoning restrictions (how is that freedom working for you, Houston?) And of course everyone, no matter how violent or deranged, has to have access to unlimited number and type of firearms.

But they are for really really big government.

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III plans to explode the prison population by strict enforcement of laws against marijuana use, including medical use, and instructed judges to impose the strictest sentences and most severe charges possible for all defendants. They LOVE the death penalty. And few things they love more than passing laws to restrict vaginas. Hundreds of laws to make it harder for women to get contraception, abortion, or even information. Laws requiring doctors to give patients false information. Laws providing funds to fake clinics that are nothing more than Christian proselytizing. They love police brutality, which Trump openly calls for. They really love having the government decides whose love has value and whose does not. They want to tell transgender people they can't serve in the military (and gays/lesbians as well). They LOVE voter suppression. Trump appointed a federal commission to make it as hard as possible for the "wrong" people (Black, Hispanic, students, poor people) to vote and more voter suppression laws have been introduced in 2017 than in 2015 and 2016 combined. They LOVE spending money on military. The US spends more than the next 9 countries combined but they want a big increase. Trump threatened military intervention against Venezuela, which has turmoil but has in no way threatened the U.S. They love passing laws making it harder to join unions. They love passing laws to take money from public schools and give it to Christian schools; the Sec. of "education" has said that is god's plan for the U.S. Scientists at EPA and other agencies have been ordered to censor their work and take out references to global warming.

And several states have passed or are considering laws that would make it legal to run down protesters. If Virginia had such a law, the murder of Heather Hayer would not have been a crime.
Click to expand...
great post! ...thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top