Total Posts:170|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why Republicans Are Hated *

inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. But the logical side of this spectrum is beginning to show greatly. A recent poll came out a few days ago. And it revealed to use just how much people here in this country, the US, hate the Republican
Party. Is it really that bad ? The answer is a resounding yes. They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know ! They dont like to compromise even when it comes to the best interest of the American people. This is an absolute travesty and a political abomination. See link below for more details. What do you think DDO.

http://cnbc.com...

or

http://www.cnbc.com...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:50:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.

Then both sides are likely to be arguing in bad faith, aren't they? If this is true, then neither side cares about the American people. And, if it's not true, then why assume that the side you disagree with is disingenuous?
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:52:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:50:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.

Then both sides are likely to be arguing in bad faith, aren't they? If this is true, then neither side cares about the American people. And, if it's not true, then why assume that the side you disagree with is disingenuous?

Because the evidence points to the other side. Anytime a Man says that he wants a President to fail is not for the people. This is their agenda and it has stood the test of time. Now you can either believe him at his word, or ignore him at your own peril.
Pick your poison. =)
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 3:56:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:52:21 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:50:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.

Then both sides are likely to be arguing in bad faith, aren't they? If this is true, then neither side cares about the American people. And, if it's not true, then why assume that the side you disagree with is disingenuous?

Because the evidence points to the other side. Anytime a Man says that he wants a President to fail is not for the people. This is their agenda and it has stood the test of time. Now you can either believe him at his word, or ignore him at your own peril.
Pick your poison. =)

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:56:36 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:52:21 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:50:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.

Then both sides are likely to be arguing in bad faith, aren't they? If this is true, then neither side cares about the American people. And, if it's not true, then why assume that the side you disagree with is disingenuous?

Because the evidence points to the other side. Anytime a Man says that he wants a President to fail is not for the people. This is their agenda and it has stood the test of time. Now you can either believe him at his word, or ignore him at your own peril.
Pick your poison. =)

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:06:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?

Of course they know. These are the underlying elements of our world today. Those who have the most information, resources, and money are in control. Its about power. Not Obama. Why is this a surprise to you. =)
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:14:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:06:30 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?

Of course they know. These are the underlying elements of our world today. Those who have the most information, resources, and money are in control. Its about power. Not Obama. Why is this a surprise to you. =)

So...
the republicans don't have the people's interest at heart because they know that the President is a puppet, which is a valid reason to want him to fail. Yet, you know this, and defend the President by attacking his attackers.

Good day, sir.
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:16:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:14:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:06:30 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?

Of course they know. These are the underlying elements of our world today. Those who have the most information, resources, and money are in control. Its about power. Not Obama. Why is this a surprise to you. =)

So...
the republicans don't have the people's interest at heart because they know that the President is a puppet, which is a valid reason to want him to fail. Yet, you know this, and defend the President by attacking his attackers.

Good day, sir.

Yes that is true. You have taken on the mindset of a conventionalist. So you will always be confused as this is what they desire. In spite of them knowing this, the objective is to make it all look very real, when it is all programmed.
Like the WWE if you will. It looks real, but it is not. Enjoy your dinner. =)
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:19:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:16:18 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:14:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:06:30 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?

Of course they know. These are the underlying elements of our world today. Those who have the most information, resources, and money are in control. Its about power. Not Obama. Why is this a surprise to you. =)

So...
the republicans don't have the people's interest at heart because they know that the President is a puppet, which is a valid reason to want him to fail. Yet, you know this, and defend the President by attacking his attackers.

Good day, sir.

Yes that is true. You have taken on the mindset of a conventionalist. So you will always be confused as this is what they desire. In spite of them knowing this, the objective is to make it all look very real, when it is all programmed.
Like the WWE if you will. It looks real, but it is not. Enjoy your dinner. =)

You said:
Because the evidence points to the other side. Anytime a Man says that he wants a President to fail is not for the people. This is their agenda and it has stood the test of time. Now you can either believe him at his word, or ignore him at your own peril.
Pick your poison. =)

This shows that you are either an idiot, a hypocrite, or part of the program. Either way, there is no reason to continue to talk to you, since you have so clearly contradicted yourself by claiming one side has fault, when you know they both are playing a game.
My work here is, finally, done.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 4:24:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 4:19:52 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:16:18 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:14:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:06:30 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:04:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 4:02:00 PM, inferno wrote:

Why?
If you believe the president is wrong, why would you want him to succeed in what you believe is harmful to the people?

Because President Obama is only a middle Man who is doing the work of a higher society. He doesnt orchestrate what is going on in our country or world.
He is a puppet.

Ahhhh, I see.
And, do all politicians know this, or just the ones in power?

Of course they know. These are the underlying elements of our world today. Those who have the most information, resources, and money are in control. Its about power. Not Obama. Why is this a surprise to you. =)

So...
the republicans don't have the people's interest at heart because they know that the President is a puppet, which is a valid reason to want him to fail. Yet, you know this, and defend the President by attacking his attackers.

Good day, sir.

Yes that is true. You have taken on the mindset of a conventionalist. So you will always be confused as this is what they desire. In spite of them knowing this, the objective is to make it all look very real, when it is all programmed.
Like the WWE if you will. It looks real, but it is not. Enjoy your dinner. =)

You said:
Because the evidence points to the other side. Anytime a Man says that he wants a President to fail is not for the people. This is their agenda and it has stood the test of time. Now you can either believe him at his word, or ignore him at your own peril.
Pick your poison. =)

This shows that you are either an idiot, a hypocrite, or part of the program. Either way, there is no reason to continue to talk to you, since you have so clearly contradicted yourself by claiming one side has fault, when you know they both are playing a game.

No. You just misread me. I said that most of the politicians you see there mean well. But the most elites are the ones calling the shots. Not the actual doers of good. Simple. The biggest dog owns the yard. =)
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 5:06:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise?

Because if one side shuts down the government to get certain things they demand, and then you fail to get ANY of the demands you wanted, then it makes you look weak, pathetic, and disorganized....

It gets even worse if they shut down the government for asinine demands, if they previously failed to get what they wanted 41 different times in the past, and if youve also completely gridlocked all progress in order to get those same demands that you fail to get time and time again...... Which is kind of exactly whats going on here
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 5:10:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 5:06:52 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise?

Because if one side shuts down the government to get certain things they demand, and then you fail to get ANY of the demands you wanted, then it makes you look weak, pathetic, and disorganized....

It gets even worse if they shut down the government for asinine demands, if they previously failed to get what they wanted 41 different times in the past, and if youve also completely gridlocked all progress in order to get those same demands that you fail to get time and time again...... Which is kind of exactly whats going on here

I was referring to a more general scenario than the current one.
In general, people accuse the other party of not negotiating, when the first is asking for something, and the second doesn't want any of it.
My work here is, finally, done.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2013 5:46:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM, inferno wrote:
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. But the logical side of this spectrum is beginning to show greatly. A recent poll came out a few days ago. And it revealed to use just how much people here in this country, the US, hate the Republican
Party. Is it really that bad ? The answer is a resounding yes. They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know ! They dont like to compromise even when it comes to the best interest of the American people. This is an absolute travesty and a political abomination. See link below for more details. What do you think DDO.

http://cnbc.com...

The polls says that there is 85% disapproval of Congress. "Hate" is not mentioned, and there is no mention of Republicans considered separately from Democrats. Traditionally, the approval rate for Congress is around 25%, if I recall correctly. That doesn't stop incumbents from being reelected about 90% of the time.

Polls always show serious inconsistency. People overwhelmingly want fiscal responsibility, but also infinite free goodies provided by government.
or

http://www.cnbc.com...
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 9:54:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 5:46:05 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM, inferno wrote:
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. But the logical side of this spectrum is beginning to show greatly. A recent poll came out a few days ago. And it revealed to use just how much people here in this country, the US, hate the Republican
Party. Is it really that bad ? The answer is a resounding yes. They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know ! They dont like to compromise even when it comes to the best interest of the American people. This is an absolute travesty and a political abomination. See link below for more details. What do you think DDO.

http://cnbc.com...

The polls says that there is 85% disapproval of Congress. "Hate" is not mentioned, and there is no mention of Republicans considered separately from Democrats. Traditionally, the approval rate for Congress is around 25%, if I recall correctly. That doesn't stop incumbents from being reelected about 90% of the time.

Polls always show serious inconsistency. People overwhelmingly want fiscal responsibility, but also infinite free goodies provided by government.
or

http://www.cnbc.com...

Congress should have term limitations. The system is broken and they have no desire to fix what is wrong because of their lust for power and personal gain. This human element is not to be ignored.
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 9:57:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM, inferno wrote:
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. ....

They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know !

k
GodChoosesLife
Posts: 3,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:03:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:47:31 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:43:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:39:08 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:29:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Fvck all the talk of compromise; I'm sick of it.

Tell me, when one group wants something and the other group doesn't, why is it vilified when the second group is "stubborn" and not wanting to compromise? Only one side truly loses in that situation.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about spending cuts, increased taxes, or Obamacare, the fact that one group wants the status quo (or even less) and another wants more, the loser loses and is vilified for fighting.

Well it appears that already today they came to an amicable agreement. I dont know the entire story as of yet, but it is breaking news. I believe most of these politicians want what is best for the American people. The ones with the most power, unfortunately, are the ones who need to go.

And why can't the ones in power, the ones who are most stubborn, also be wanting what is best for Americans? Just because you disagree with their policies, doesn't mean they are acting in bad faith.

Because absolute power corrupts. Man rules in the flesh if he is not directed by God.

Amen to this!
Better than deserved, as ALWAYS.
"The strongest principle of growth lies in human choices."
"The Lord doesn't promise us a perfect life that is free of problems, but he does promise that He'll get us through anything." ~SweeTea
"Good Times" ~ Max
"If Jesus isn't in heaven, then it's not heaven; instead, it's hell." ~anonymous
"Suffering is unimaginably confusing, but it's a way to be drawn closer to God" ~Me
"Tell me what consumes your heart most, and I'll tell you who your God is." ~Dad
Cowboy0108
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:56:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM, inferno wrote:
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. But the logical side of this spectrum is beginning to show greatly. A recent poll came out a few days ago. And it revealed to use just how much people here in this country, the US, hate the Republican
Party. Is it really that bad ? The answer is a resounding yes. They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know ! They dont like to compromise even when it comes to the best interest of the American people. This is an absolute travesty and a political abomination. See link below for more details. What do you think DDO.

http://cnbc.com...

or

http://www.cnbc.com...

Major logical fallacy.
1. Neither party is compromising-which is good
2. What you say is good for the people is not what the republicans were elected to say is good for the American people. Let me guess, you think gun control and welfare is good for the Americans don't you. They are not. They, as republicans, only vote for ideas that are not iconoclastic to them and the people they represent. This is why they do not compromise.

But I do agree with one thing, congress sucks, the president sucks, heck, it isn't just the people(though the people do suck) , it is the entire concept of our central government and it needs across the board change.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:00:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 10:56:10 AM, Cowboy0108 wrote:
At 10/16/2013 3:07:25 PM, inferno wrote:
This is not just a personal opinion of mine here today. But the logical side of this spectrum is beginning to show greatly. A recent poll came out a few days ago. And it revealed to use just how much people here in this country, the US, hate the Republican
Party. Is it really that bad ? The answer is a resounding yes. They are the most stubborn and obstructionistic people I know ! They dont like to compromise even when it comes to the best interest of the American people. This is an absolute travesty and a political abomination. See link below for more details. What do you think DDO.

http://cnbc.com...

or

http://www.cnbc.com...

Major logical fallacy.
1. Neither party is compromising-which is good
2. What you say is good for the people is not what the republicans were elected to say is good for the American people. Let me guess, you think gun control and welfare is good for the Americans don't you. They are not. They, as republicans, only vote for ideas that are not iconoclastic to them and the people they represent. This is why they do not compromise.

But I do agree with one thing, congress sucks, the president sucks, heck, it isn't just the people(though the people do suck) , it is the entire concept of our central government and it needs across the board change.

Society has given way to corruption and greed. Man has a froward mind and his mindset is perverse. But I am not an advocate for gun control or welfare Cowboy. I believe that the middle class is at its best when it is financially progressing, and that guns should be allowed by all.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:23:36 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 9:54:50 AM, inferno wrote:
Congress should have term limitations. The system is broken and they have no desire to fix what is wrong because of their lust for power and personal gain. This human element is not to be ignored.

Your presumption is that progress equates to unimpeded increase in government control. It's wrong to claim a refusal to accept government control is a "lust for power" when it's just the opposite.

I'm not sure about term limitations. What is tends to do is shift power to a faceless bureaucracy that really runs the government as politicians briefly enter and leave the stage. Japan has been stuck in that situation for decades. But maybe it's a chance to turn back the new style of socialism-by-regulation.

In any case, the OP was dead wrong and indefensible.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:26:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:23:36 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/17/2013 9:54:50 AM, inferno wrote:
Congress should have term limitations. The system is broken and they have no desire to fix what is wrong because of their lust for power and personal gain. This human element is not to be ignored.

Your presumption is that progress equates to unimpeded increase in government control. It's wrong to claim a refusal to accept government control is a "lust for power" when it's just the opposite.

I'm not sure about term limitations. What is tends to do is shift power to a faceless bureaucracy that really runs the government as politicians briefly enter and leave the stage. Japan has been stuck in that situation for decades. But maybe it's a chance to turn back the new style of socialism-by-regulation.

In any case, the OP was dead wrong and indefensible.

A lust for power is a valid reason my friend. These issues may seem subjective to you, but they are vastly underrated. If you knew just how corrupt your friends were, then perhaps you would not be so eager to ignore these simple truths.
I doubt you are capable of understanding human nature as I do. My perceptivity is superior to yours. Guranteed. =)
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:06:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:26:12 AM, inferno wrote:
Your presumption is that progress equates to unimpeded increase in government control. It's wrong to claim a refusal to accept government control is a "lust for power" when it's just the opposite. ...


A lust for power is a valid reason my friend. These issues may seem subjective to you, but they are vastly underrated. If you knew just how corrupt your friends were, then perhaps you would not be so eager to ignore these simple truths.
I doubt you are capable of understanding human nature as I do. My perceptivity is superior to yours. Guranteed. =)

You need to explain how getting rid of regulations and letting people do as they wish is a lust for power, while wanting government regulation of every detail of economic and social life is not a lust for power. I guess your vast understanding only gives answers, not reasons.

For the record, the Obama administration is the most corrupt in memory. The revel in secrecy, have mastered stonewalling to cover up corruption, and use government to reward friends and punish enemies. Nixon was a pussycat by comparison. Obama does have a more cheerful persona than Nixon; that's useful. Nixon wouldn't be cute playing golf in short pants like Obama.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:11:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 12:06:21 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:26:12 AM, inferno wrote:
Your presumption is that progress equates to unimpeded increase in government control. It's wrong to claim a refusal to accept government control is a "lust for power" when it's just the opposite. ...


A lust for power is a valid reason my friend. These issues may seem subjective to you, but they are vastly underrated. If you knew just how corrupt your friends were, then perhaps you would not be so eager to ignore these simple truths.
I doubt you are capable of understanding human nature as I do. My perceptivity is superior to yours. Guranteed. =)

You need to explain how getting rid of regulations and letting people do as they wish is a lust for power, while wanting government regulation of every detail of economic and social life is not a lust for power. I guess your vast understanding only gives answers, not reasons.

For the record, the Obama administration is the most corrupt in memory. The revel in secrecy, have mastered stonewalling to cover up corruption, and use government to reward friends and punish enemies. Nixon was a pussycat by comparison. Obama does have a more cheerful persona than Nixon; that's useful. Nixon wouldn't be cute playing golf in short pants like Obama.

You are only selectively assuming that the Obama Administration is the most corrupt in recent memory. You have no way of knowing who did what with whom beforehand. And getting rid of regulations while downsizing the middle class and social progression is about as backward as two left shoes. Nixon was the absolute worst and Obama will never resign or be impeached. So dont worry, youll be fine once this is all over with. AND I doubt youll be able to understand just how bad the next guy is gonna be. =)
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:51:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 12:11:46 PM, inferno wrote:
You are only selectively assuming that the Obama Administration is the most corrupt in recent memory. You have no way of knowing who did what with whom beforehand. And getting rid of regulations while downsizing the middle class and social progression is about as backward as two left shoes. Nixon was the absolute worst and Obama will never resign or be impeached. So dont worry, youll be fine once this is all over with. AND I doubt youll be able to understand just how bad the next guy is gonna be. =)

You're right that "most corrupt" is hard to prove. I remember every Administration back to Eisenhower. I have not only what happened at the time, but what has been revealed since. Nixon was corrupt, but his coverups were bumbling and incompetent. Nixon had an enemies list of public figures who opposed him, and he used the IRS to harass them. Obama upped the ante by allowing the harassment of ordinary citizens who opposed him. Republican supporters found themselves subject to investigation by a half dozen government agencies, all finding nothing wrong. I don't know if Obama directed the harassment, but there is no question he made it clear he thought it was justified and that he didn't stop it. That's a new high in corruption.

Your premise is that regulation promotes the middle class and social progress. So is it true that heavily regulated North Korea has a larger middle class and is more socially progressive than less regulated South Korea? How about India, which in which there has been substantially more social and economic progress since they ended democratic socialism? Redistribution of wealth requires, without exception, a privileged class that controls redistribution, and that class looks after their own interests ahead of everyone else. Since Obama took office, average income in the US has dropped by six percent, but incomes in Washington have risen by over 30%. Washington is the only place unaffected by the collapse in housing prices. Freedom promotes economic and social progress, not regulation.
inferno
Posts: 10,655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:54:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:51:03 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/17/2013 12:11:46 PM, inferno wrote:
You are only selectively assuming that the Obama Administration is the most corrupt in recent memory. You have no way of knowing who did what with whom beforehand. And getting rid of regulations while downsizing the middle class and social progression is about as backward as two left shoes. Nixon was the absolute worst and Obama will never resign or be impeached. So dont worry, youll be fine once this is all over with. AND I doubt youll be able to understand just how bad the next guy is gonna be. =)

You're right that "most corrupt" is hard to prove. I remember every Administration back to Eisenhower. I have not only what happened at the time, but what has been revealed since. Nixon was corrupt, but his coverups were bumbling and incompetent. Nixon had an enemies list of public figures who opposed him, and he used the IRS to harass them. Obama upped the ante by allowing the harassment of ordinary citizens who opposed him. Republican supporters found themselves subject to investigation by a half dozen government agencies, all finding nothing wrong. I don't know if Obama directed the harassment, but there is no question he made it clear he thought it was justified and that he didn't stop it. That's a new high in corruption.

Your premise is that regulation promotes the middle class and social progress. So is it true that heavily regulated North Korea has a larger middle class and is more socially progressive than less regulated South Korea? How about India, which in which there has been substantially more social and economic progress since they ended democratic socialism? Redistribution of wealth requires, without exception, a privileged class that controls redistribution, and that class looks after their own interests ahead of everyone else. Since Obama took office, average income in the US has dropped by six percent, but incomes in Washington have risen by over 30%. Washington is the only place unaffected by the collapse in housing prices. Freedom promotes economic and social progress, not regulation.

But adequate regulation is freedom. We have the ability to make rules that cater to all demographics of people. The reason why the system is so unstable and unbalanced is because of our humanity. We are emotional people. We want wealth, prestige, power, and esteem. And with these things come greed and the lust for power. The Bible clearly tells us that in the last days Men will become lovers of themselves.
So for every self loving politician, that is a strike against you. =)
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:55:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 12:06:21 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:26:12 AM, inferno wrote:
Your presumption is that progress equates to unimpeded increase in government control. It's wrong to claim a refusal to accept government control is a "lust for power" when it's just the opposite. ...


A lust for power is a valid reason my friend. These issues may seem subjective to you, but they are vastly underrated. If you knew just how corrupt your friends were, then perhaps you would not be so eager to ignore these simple truths.
I doubt you are capable of understanding human nature as I do. My perceptivity is superior to yours. Guranteed. =)

You need to explain how getting rid of regulations and letting people do as they wish is a lust for power, while wanting government regulation of every detail of economic and social life is not a lust for power. I guess your vast understanding only gives answers, not reasons.

For the record, the Obama administration is the most corrupt in memory. The revel in secrecy, have mastered stonewalling to cover up corruption, and use government to reward friends and punish enemies. Nixon was a pussycat by comparison. Obama does have a more cheerful persona than Nixon; that's useful. Nixon wouldn't be cute playing golf in short pants like Obama.

Maybe I can help - A "Lust for power" happens when one side wants to be ale to do whatever they want. A "not lust for power" happens when one side wants to be bound by limits on their ability, in exchange for more predictable social rules.

About the whole "Obama is super-corrupt" yeah. I don't see it, but this is why Republicans are losing the electoral popularity contest. They keep saying things like that. It's all about death panels, and socialism, and the apocalypse, and god hates gays, and the end of America and Freedom, and wars on Christmas. It is IMPOSSIBLE to keep taking this sort of thing seriously anymore. The sky just isn't falling, and nobody wants to be mad all the time.

See, people can't go outside and play with each other if one side keeps saying crazy shizz. Eventually, you just have to leave them alone and let them be mad by themselves.

About Nixon... I am pretty liberal, and I for some reason don't hate the guy. I like the things that he did that were legal as president. I like the EPA, and the Clean Air Act, and I like that he opened up with China, and ended Vietnam. Things like that, and I tend to think Obama is to the right of Nixon on a lot of things.