Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,467,170 times
Reputation: 6670
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2
And the opposite view has won many recent elections by promising people entitlements that the country cannot pay for.
It may be a tired talking point, but it's also indisputable fact.
I'd rather lose elections by telling the truth than win elections by making false promises that are going to inevitably end in misery for millions when the money runs out.
But when you can no longer win elections and you're just living with your own exclusive idea of the ''truth'', then don't you become the very definition of an ''elitist'' (or cult member, as the case may be)...?
But when you can no longer win elections and you're just living with your own exclusive idea of the ''truth'', then don't you become the very definition of an ''elitist'' (or cult member, as the case may be)...?
"winning elections" is not about being correct. There are plenty of idiots in the US who voted for Obama who have done so at the expense of the nation, but in the belief that they would receive more and more federal benefits. Those in the dependent class will always vote for someone who will give them more money/benefits and do not understand the cost or implications to the nation as a whole.
One must defend and support the principles that benefit both the individual and the nation as a whole. The constituents of the left cannot plan or think beyond lunchtime, let alone five years in advance. The policy of massive federal spending in an effort to secure the "favor" of those receiving the benefits is a fools game which will destroy the nation. Yet those who want to secure power will sacrifice the best interest of the nation and give the dependent class exactly what THEY want, in exchange for re-election.
So the cycle goes........................... until it stops.
This whole con game of "votes for treats" will eventually end. Those who have received the treats will be left destitute when the whole scheme ends.
The promise of the nation, when it originated, was equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. This promise brought the hard working and innovative from around the globe to realize their dreams.......or to fail. There was never a guarantee.
Now we have a marxist President who has subverted and opposed the principles that have produced the greatest nation on earth. His promise is one of short term "treats" in exchange for liberty and votes. .............. it the US turned upside down. God help us. The nation will probably not survive the "work" of Obama.
How dare he take a swig of water or disagree with anything dear leader has to say. I remember one of the darlings of the left at one time screaming this to their cheers........... how times have changed..........
Rubio an enemy? Nope. But laughing stock? For sure.
Somebody ought to rehearse these guys before they go on camera. Rebutting a state of the union speech is not Amateur Hour.
How dare he take a swig of water or disagree with anything dear leader has to say. I remember one of the darlings of the left at one time screaming this to their cheers........... how times have changed.....
I didn't give a damn about him before and I don't now.
Rubio an enemy? Nope. But laughing stock? For sure.
Somebody ought to rehearse these guys before they go on camera. Rebutting a state of the union speech is not Amateur Hour.
This is their defense mechanism any time someone laughs at one of their people. Fairly transparent gambit.
He is the enemy in your eyes. That is what is wrong with the left. Anyone who doesn't agree is the enemy. Their character is assassinated all with the help of the propaganda masters in the media. They are right now digging up dirt on Ben Carson I'm sure to attack him next in case he dare speak his mind again. It's pathetic.
That's funny. I don't consider him an enemy! He's just another person.
I believe in giving attention to everyone who runs for president, no matter the party. However, the republicans have to stop peering into women's insides; stop peeping into people's bedrooms; stop pretending they are experts on rape; stop trying to shove their brand of religion down everyone's throats; stop making fun of science; and start showing a modicum of humanity, before I will look at a republican candidate seriously.
It's well past time for the republicans to clean house if they want to be credible as a political party.
Also, you have a lot of nerve using the words 'character assassination'. How soon we forget 'swift-boating', Obama is a muslim, Obama's not a citizen, Obama's a (take your pick) fascist, marxist, communist. Do you even read what you write, or is it cut and pasted from various hate-group emails?
It's OK for conservatives to make fun of the tiniest slip-up of Obama's (mispronouncing a word) but not OK for everyone to get a chuckle over 'watergate'. Sheesh, Obama makes a mistake and immediately there are ten threads on here about it (guess you all subscribe to the same bulk email). It's kind of funny, actually.
And the opposite view has won many recent elections by promising people entitlements that the country cannot pay for.
It may be a tired talking point, but it's also indisputable fact.
I'd rather lose elections by telling the truth than win elections by making false promises that are going to inevitably end in misery for millions when the money runs out.
Not only is it NOT indisputable, it's false.
The idea that a candidate promising voters policies that will make their lives better is somehow indecent is pretzel logic but has become a Frank Luntz talking point for the party that promises goodies for the plutocrats instead of the middle class.
The assertion that the nation can't afford entitlements, that people pay for all their working lives, is false. We can certainly afford them. We did in the past when we had reasonable tax rates on the rich. Besides, programs like Social Security are paid with dedicated taxes. But the GOP is fixated with the discredited notion of trickle down economics -- if we just lower the taxes on the rich and pay for that by slashing programs for everyone else, prosperity will just trickle down to everyone. 30 years of this policy proves that it only makes the rich even richer (no surprise there.)
Last edited by MTAtech; 02-15-2013 at 04:57 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
