• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Check out this balanced budget proposal I found:

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/balanced-budget-plan

One of the highlights:

Amazing how shortsighted these people are. They are, by far, the most selfish group of people in the country. Almost everything they propose involves screwing over younger generations while leaving all their own benefits intact.

It's disgusting to watch. I can't believe they think basically ending some sort of educational standard in this country will be a benefit.
 

LosDaddie

Banned
You mean someone exactly like her? Do as I say, not what I do!

What? :lol

Coulter is a best selling author, speaker, and pundit. She makes living doing only that, unlike nutjobs like Cain/Newt/Palin/etc who run for office knowing they can't possibly win, but rather to hopefully secure lucrative book deals and Fox News gigs after their failed run. She made a very good point there.


But then again up until 2008 that was her shtick. She would outright say dumb shit every other republican would say in dog whistles..

It's still her schtick (just read her recent book's title. :lol ), and I prefer her style over the dog whistles other pundits use. Part of the reason why dog whistles are used is to trap people up in the "If you see racism/sexism in that statement, then it's YOU who is the racist/sexist here!" argument.
 

Tim-E

Member
The Afghan people obviously no longer want us there, and who could blame them after the last month? We need to be out of there yesterday. Gallup said that half of Americans support a quicker withdrawl, so I think this would just be another positive for Obama to tout while in campaign mode this year to rally the troups on the left. It makes no sense for us to be there any longer.

Amazing how shortsighted these people are. They are, by far, the most selfish group of people in the country. Almost everything they propose involves screwing over younger generations while leaving all their own benefits intact.

It's disgusting to watch. I can't believe they think basically ending some sort of educational standard in this country will be a benefit.

It's amazing how angry I get over how fucked our education system is and how much these people want to butcher it now that I have a daughter.
 

Measley

Junior Member
There is certainly a vocal cadre of fairly activist gay people who are really unhappy with Obama, but

A: they are not the majority
B: they are voting for Obama anyway

Couldn't imagine a gay person voting for someone who boasts about limiting their rights.

Obama's public apathy towards the issue is far better than the GOP's outright war on the issue.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Check out this balanced budget proposal I found:

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/balanced-budget-plan

One of the highlights:

Jesus christ @ dismantling the departments of education & housing and urban development, basically all of energy R&D except nuclear weapons for the army, repealing PPACA, increasing medicare premiums and deductibles, all but ending medicaid grants, eliminating training services, raising the social security retirement age, cutting funding for the disabled, privatizing air traffic control and Amtrak, ending urban transit grants and rail subsidies, halving the EITC, halving NASA's budget, privatizing the Corps of Engineers, repealing Davis-Bacon, ending subsidies for CNCS and the CPB.

All of these are terrible, awful, horrible proposals. And I'm sure I missed a few others from the list.
 
Allen West Says Stock Market Is Up Because a Republican Will Be President

As it turns out, taking GOP credit for the market is remarkably easy. "I would think maybe the markets are looking five to six months down the road when we have a change in leadership in this country," West said, without batting an eye.

When host Neil Cavuto asked if West was really suggesting that Republican power in either the White House or the Senate is causing the market recovery, West said, "It depends on how far the futures are looking down the road... There is a new kind of hope that might be out there."
 
The battle for women voters continues onward:

With emotions still raw from the fight over President Obama’s contraception mandate, Senate Democrats are beginning a push to renew the Violence Against Women Act, the once broadly bipartisan 1994 legislation that now faces fierce opposition from conservatives.

The legislation would continue existing grant programs to local law enforcement and battered women shelters, but would expand efforts to reach Indian tribes and rural areas. It would increase the availability of free legal assistance to victims of domestic violence, extend the definition of violence against women to include stalking, and provide training for civil and criminal court personnel to deal with families with a history of violence. It would also allow more battered illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas, and would include same-sex couples in programs for domestic violence.

Republicans say the measure, under the cloak of battered women, unnecessarily expands immigration avenues by creating new definitions for immigrant victims to claim battery. More important, they say, it fails to put in safeguards to ensure that domestic violence grants are being well spent. It also dilutes the focus on domestic violence by expanding protections to new groups, like same-sex couples, they say.

But if Republican lawmakers are not eager to oppose a domestic violence bill, conservative activists are itching for a fight. Janice Shaw Crouse, a senior fellow at the conservative Concerned Women for America, said her group had been pressing senators hard to oppose reauthorization of legislation she called “a boondoggle” that vastly expands government and “creates an ideology that all men are guilty and all women are victims.”

Last month on the conservative Web site Townhall.com, the conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly called the Violence Against Women Act a slush fund “used to fill feminist coffers” and demanded that Republicans stand up against legislation that promotes “divorce, breakup of marriage and hatred of men.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/us/politics/violence-against-women-act-divides-senate.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

We'll see who leads who soon on this one. My money is on the politicians and not the activists.
 
Karzai said he wants the U.S. out by the end of the year.

Really? I have a feeling that guy will either be dead or have fled the country within 2 years after we leave.

Well if he wants us out that sounds like a great opportunity to give them what they want.
 

Wilsongt

Member
The battle for women voters continues onward:

It also dilutes the focus on domestic violence by expanding protections to new groups, like same-sex couples, they say.

We'll see who leads who soon on this one. My money is on the politicians and not the activists.

Of course, because a same sex couple where one is being battered and abused by the other isn't technically domestic violence. It's... something else?

God these people are so ignorant and stupid.
 
The oil industry isn't a 'free market'.

It isn't and it can never be so. The US is a rare nation that allows people to own their mineral rights. In most countries, all that oil is owned by the government whether it is offshore or beneath your house. Thus the oil market is largely controlled by governments. And the biggest oil companies are pretty much all government oil companies. Exxon-Mobile is a pygmy.
worlds_largest_oil_and_gas_companies_2008.gif


http://www.petrostrategies.org/Links/Worlds_Largest_Oil_and_Gas_Companies_Sites.htm


The entire drill-more in the USA to reduce gas prices is delusional. But people don't want to hear that . . . they want to hear someone tell them that all we have to do is drill ANWR and all is fixed. That is nonsense.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Weekly UI claims reversed last week's increase, and then some.



Last week was the first increase in a couple of months and I was watching to see if it was noise, or the start of a trend. So far looks like noise.

Also, the first manufacturing report of the month (Empire State survey) showed an increase in production; expectation was for a small drop. Economic data is off to a good start this month.


I can't wait to see when/if the 4 week average gets below 350,000. I read that's a line that many people are waiting to see happen and it means good solid positive job growth.
 

ToxicAdam

Member
Raise additional taxes on these permits to offset costs of potential spills. Oil industry might fuss a bit, but they will still get on-board to make more money.
 
Interesting Wonkbook stuff

Will House Republicans hold the Highway Bill hostage leading to well, FUCKING the recovery:
Now Boehner looks likely to take up the Senate bill. And if he fails, and nothing passes by March 31, and, all at once, state access to infrastructure funding dries up, and tens of thousands of construction workers are fired, and it becomes even more difficult for states to trust that they can plan long-term infrastructure investments that rely on Congress not doing an incredibly terrible job? Well, as you saw at the top, I don't have a great word for what will happen. But it'll be bad.

GOP Congressman to propose Millionaire surtax:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74042.html
 

ToxicAdam

Member
I know ... nothing matters. Deficits, revenues, jobs, oil and money. We just tell the people that tree leaves are now money and they can do whatever they like. We can all live in eternal happiness.

I look forward to my future job as a back rubber. I have strong hands and a loving heart.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Obama's public apathy towards the issue is far better than the GOP's outright war on the issue.

Actually to be honest Obama doesn't have a public apathy towards gay rights. He's publicly talked about his support and signage of gay rights into law even.

Why do some people seem to get this wrong?
 
Actually to be honest Obama doesn't have a public apathy towards gay rights. He's publicly talked about his support and signage of gay rights into law even.

Why do some people seem to get this wrong?

They get it wrong because they can't see all the support and progress Obama has made on gay rights. Well, everything except outright supporting Gay Marriage, which I am 99% sure is coming if he is re-elected.
 
You don't have to drill to create jobs, and the government doesn't need tax revenue.

So why do it?
What country do you live in?
I think I got into an argument with EV about this when I first started posting in PoliGAF. I think MMT is a fairly compelling hypothesis, though I don't have enough knowledge to be able to evaluate its claims fully. But you can't go around declaring things that are radically at odds with the conventional ways of understanding certain concepts without announcing it at the start; it just confuses people. I believe last time I described it as a 'unilateral war on language.'
 

kehs

Banned
Actually to be honest Obama doesn't have a public apathy towards gay rights. He's publicly talked about his support and signage of gay rights into law even.

Why do some people seem to get this wrong?

Something something equal but separate something.
 
What country do you live in?

The US. It has to tax. It doesn't require tax revenue. Those are two different things. The concern of tax policy should not be revenue (since that is irrelevant to a government that creates its own money), but (1) what level of aggregate demand you want (do you want to heat up or cool down the economy?); and (2) what substantive policy objectives you want to accomplish through taxation (decrease inequality? discourage use of gasoline? etc.).

When you understand why the federal government can take all the money it collects in taxes and literally burn it up in flames without having any affect on anything, then you will understand what it means to say that the government does not require tax revenue.

See: http://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf (PDF) for more info.

Note that this doesn't apply to state governments, which use and depend upon what is effectively a foreign currency (US dollars). Those governments do require tax revenue. They cannot burn it up upon receiving it, but must use that revenue to spend. Although I have to say my preference is to eliminate state "sovereignty" altogether.
 
re-upped it to a site that works here

XxE4o.jpg


and holy fuck.


For fucking fuck's sake, if they're gonna go that far, why even try to hide it so thinly...the word is 'renege' Why not just come out and say "I hain't votin' fer the nigra" and get it over...

fuck

also the ducks and the Benelli play right into the whole "clinging to their guns and religion" thing...

fuck again...just because...
 
What the shit? There's so much wrong with this? Isn't Mississippi the poorest state in the country? And doesn't it receive more money from the federal government than any other state? ( like $2.00 for every $1.00 the contribute) What the fuck?

Clearly he wants the US to start taking humanitarian aide from the UN and such
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom