• 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 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pigeon

Banned
ClovingWestbrook said:
###
Click to expand...

It's a non-commitment. "If it doesn't hurt the poor and very elderly we should take a look at it." Well, obviously, that's true. I think, in general, if people can propose a welfare reform that doesn't cut benefits for the least privileged but saves money overall, I probably support that. But the whole problem with chained CPI is that it hurts the poor! So, basically, if we can get the benefits of chained CPI without the problems, should we do it? Obviously yes we should, but committing to that is meaningless.
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Fuchsdh said:
Nothing like trying to roll back some of the most important progressive reforms of the 20th century. How is this supposed to improve the problems with our educational system again?
Click to expand...

I honestly believe that even some of the "government is too big" conservatives at the moment would balk at the idea of getting rid of the department of education completely.
 
O

Owzers

Member
CPAC is like a Hannity Convention, hard to not watch but infuriatingly stupid. Guy talking right now is trying to find several ways of saying we need to bomb Iran now to show them we mean business without actually turning it into a beach boys song.

Benghazi attack happened because Obama cut our military readiness.
 
G

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
The Technomancer said:
I honestly believe that even some of the "government is too big" conservatives at the moment would balk at the idea of getting rid of the department of education completely.
Click to expand...

I'd rather ths DoE be expanded so that education standards are consistent across states.
 
E

el retorno

Member
Breitbart Editor in Chief is calling for Regime Change (by military means if needed) in Iran.

Didn't we just fucking try this 10 years ago?
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
GaimeGuy said:
I'd rather ths DoE be expanded so that education standards are consistent across states.
Click to expand...
Well that was the huge problem with NCLB, and it's so obvious in theory I have no idea why they didn't see that the states would game it for their own interests. If they get to decide the standards of course they're going to lower the bar.
 
O

Owzers

Member
el retorno said:
Breitbart Editor in Chief is calling for Regime Change (by military means if needed) in Iran.

Didn't we just fucking try this 10 years ago?
Click to expand...

I loved this guy's speech though. It's like the prologue to a FPS. Gimme the tank let's roll.



And the other guy before him who complained that American Journalism is dead because of their lack of Benghazi coverage.

But Breitbart.com is alive and well, bringing you the truth behind Hagel's Friends of Hamas ties.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
el retorno said:
The funny thing is Dems are bending over backwards to cut benefits but it won't happen because the GOP is so crazy they won't take the offer.
Click to expand...

I think they'll take it. And we'll all be worse off.

ClovingWestbrook said:
Pelosi said:
"In terms of C.P.I., I have said let's take a look at that," she said at a weekly press briefing in Washington. "What is it -- there are elements in our party, who have said that we can do this without hurting the poor and the very elderly. So let's see what that is. There are others who are objecting to it plain and simple. I have to say if we can demonstrate that it doesn't hurt the poor and the very elderly, then let's take a look at it because compared to what? Compared to what? Compared to Republicans saying Medicare should wither on the vine? Social Security has no place in a free society? These are their words. These are their words."
Click to expand...

###
Click to expand...

Since when the fuck were the poor and elderly the only people in society worth caring about? Pelosi's argument assumes that the government must reduce the standard of living for some Americans. That argument is wrong, and advances the deeply conservative trope that we have to tighten our collective belts because our government is running out of money.

Democrats like Pelosi who insist on disseminating extremist right-wing Republican talking points are slowly murdering any semblance of pro-Democratic lesser-evilism I have ever entertained. I'm not voting for or defending right-wing idiots, even if they run under the banner of the Democratic party.

pigeon said:
It's a non-commitment. "If it doesn't hurt the poor and very elderly we should take a look at it." Well, obviously, that's true. I think, in general, if people can propose a welfare reform that doesn't cut benefits for the least privileged but saves money overall, I probably support that. But the whole problem with chained CPI is that it hurts the poor! So, basically, if we can get the benefits of chained CPI without the problems, should we do it? Obviously yes we should, but committing to that is meaningless.
Click to expand...

There are no benefits of chained CPI. It's a benefits cut, period. I'd be interested in hearing an explanation of what you think the benefits of chained CPI are.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
sillymonkey321 said:
I loved this guy's speech though. It's like the prologue to a FPS. Gimme the tank let's roll.



And the other guy before him who complained that American Journalism is dead because of their lack of Benghazi coverage.

But Breitbart.com is alive and well, bringing you the truth behind Hagel's Friends of Hamas ties.
Click to expand...
And they informed us all about Paul Krugman's bankruptcy.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
empty vessel said:
There are no benefits of chained CPI. It's a benefits cut, period. I'd be interested in hearing an explanation of what you think the benefits of chained CPI are.
Click to expand...

Who cares? It's actually irrelevant to the logical point at hand. If we could do X, and eliminate all the negative consequences while keeping any positive consequences, should we do X? I'd argue that we should at least consider it regardless of X! After all, the worst thing that could happen is nothing bad, because we explicitly removed that possibility!
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Cyan said:
I mean, yes, but that's not really relevant. You can say "if we get rid of the problems with chained CPI, let's do it!" but getting rid of the problems essentially means not doing it at all.
Click to expand...

Well, right, that's why I said that Pelosi wasn't actually making a commitment to anything when she said that. She said "let's take a look at this policy, if we can remove the huge problem with it which is a fundamental aspect of the policy." This is a pretty common political move, but it's an error to read it as a big shift, because it's deliberately designed to commit to nothing.
 
O

Owzers

Member
speculawyer said:
Bill Maher

BTW . . . did someone actually say that first sentence?
Click to expand...

yep, a guy on the cpac panel just now, it's paying off so much in humor. Now the next guy is complaining that it's been 7 months since the attack and we haven't brought anyone to justice yet when after 9/11 we brought justice in a month.


Justice means ANYTHING these days.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Uh oh . . . Ashley Judd just lost any chance she had at winning . . .


tumblr_mjjvtdWZsD1qat9xfo1_1280.png
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
pigeon said:
Who cares? It's actually irrelevant to the logical point at hand. If we could do X, and eliminate all the negative consequences while keeping any positive consequences, should we do X? I'd argue that we should at least consider it regardless of X! After all, the worst thing that could happen is nothing bad, because we explicitly removed that possibility!
Click to expand...

I agree with the logic of the sentiment as expressed here, but I think your first response assumed that maintaining benefits levels for the poor and elderly while dropping them for everybody else is an example of eliminating all the negative consequences while keeping any positive consequences. Specifically, you said, "But the whole problem with chained CPI is that it hurts the poor!" That's not true. The whole problem with chained CPI is that it hurts all Americans. Reducing the benefits of a person who is just outside the poverty line, or, indeed, a typical middle class individual, is a negative consequence of chained CPI. Nancy says fuck those people. And she says fuck those people without providing any reason for why they require fucking. It's a senseless fucking.
 
E

el retorno

Member
http://www.theonion.com/articles/14...g&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default

WASHINGTON—At an age when most boys are going to Little League practice and playing video games with their friends, spunky Congressional whiz kid Paul Ryan, 14, has issued a comprehensive proposal to balance the federal budget, impressed Washington sources told reporters Thursday. “When I was 14 years old, all I was thinking about was having enough allowance money to buy comic books, but this little teen dynamo is actually trying to rein in annual spending and eliminate the deficit,” Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) said of the perky, high-school-age wonder boy, whose budget reform plan seeks to reduce government spending by $4.6 trillion by 2023 through a long-term fiscal policy that includes deep cuts to food stamps and other entitlement programs.

“He comes in here every day in his little two-piece suit, with his snazzy haircut that it looks like his mom gave him, and you just have to admire the kid. Heck, he’s still three years away from applying for college, for God’s sake! I imagine he’s not too popular with the other kids his age, but I’m sure he’s used to that by now.” Despite their enthusiasm for the teen whiz kid’s pluck and hard work, Congressional sources were quick to note that Ryan’s budget plan made “absolutely no sense.”
Click to expand...
 
C

Clevinger

Member
pigeon said:
Well, right, that's why I said that Pelosi wasn't actually making a commitment to anything when she said that. She said "let's take a look at this policy, if we can remove the huge problem with it which is a fundamental aspect of the policy." This is a pretty common political move, but it's an error to read it as a big shift, because it's deliberately designed to commit to nothing.
Click to expand...

It might not be a big shift, but it's yet another example of a Democrat starting the discussion from the right. Instead of "Let's remove the cap on Social Security!" or "Let's reduce our debt by implementing Medicare For All!", it's "Let's look at these Social Security cuts if they're not too bad."
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Clevinger said:
It might not be a big shift, but it's yet another example of a Democrat starting the discussion from the right. Instead of "Let's remove the cap on Social Security!" or "Let's reduce our debt by implementing Medicare For All!", it's "Let's look at these Social Security cuts if they're not too bad."
Click to expand...

It also throws into question whether they're bad or not. If one side is saying let's do it, and the other is saying "Well, we'll see, maybe we can. We'll check it out," then people will believe the center is between those two, and perhaps they could do it. And they'll also wonder why one side apparently hasn't even researched it yet. If one side is saying let's do it and the other is saying "What are you fucking nuts? Do you know what this does? Here's something much more logical" then that shifts the center of the debate.
 
L

LegendofJoe

Member
Fenderputty said:
And here we were trying to mandate preschool. Who knew the educational system only needed a large dose of freedom to solve our educational problems.
Click to expand...

Freedom solves everything, how can you say to a child that they shouldn't be able to study cartoons and toy hoarding? Some valuable knowledge could be gained from that.
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
LegendofJoe said:
Freedom solves everything, how can you say to a child that they shouldn't be able to study cartoons and toy hoarding? Some valuable knowledge could be gained from that.
Click to expand...
The problem with homeschooling is usually that the parents who are doing it are not the parents who should be doing it.
 
O

Owzers

Member
tucker carlson vs some liberal guy debate fight now on cspan......at cpac of course.

what the fudge? the first question: " America is the world's policeman, get over it"


The heck is that a question? It doesn't end in a question mark.

Oh man Tucker is killing it, we are the world's policeman but not their social worker. Other countries are too cheap to do the job we have to.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
RUBIO: I respect people who disagree with me on certain things, but that means they have to respect me too. Just because I believe states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot. Just because we believe that life, all human life, all life, all human life is worthy of protection in every stage of its development doesn’t make you a chauvinist. In fact, the people who are actually close minded in American politics are people who love to preach about the certainty of science in regard to our climate, but ignore the absolute fact that life begins at conception.
Click to expand...


Well, I guess that settles it then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
945
dragonyeuw replied
The Drunk GAF Containment Thread
Social Community 7 8 9 10 11
520
11K
ForAcademicPurposes replied
What are you thankful for this turkey day?
17
847
MaestroMike replied
Bad games with redeeming qualities
2 3
116
5K
Koenigssee replied
Next Generation is going to be really strange because of A.I
2
58
2K
midnightAI replied
Top Bottom