How about some liberal tutelage?

[JD Barleycorn]

We are all aware that some of us are right thinking conservatives and other are all feeling liberals but I really am curious about this. Can the liberals here speak directly to the point without insult, blaming Bush, or trying to change the subject about our concerns. Can you make a convincing argument about some of the following topics;

Should Obama's uncle be deported? He is an illegal and was nailed with a DWI.

On the payroll tax cut the GOP wanted to extend the cut for 12 months and the democrats only wanted 2 months. How can the democrats say that the GOP was trying to take money from the taxpayers?

The payroll tax is our Social Security payment matched by our employer up to $100,000 in income. The talk is about cutting 2% of the 6.2% that we pay which leaves us paying 4.2% for the next two months. Won't this personally bite us in the ass 20-30-40 years from now? As a nation, where do we get the extra $100 billion that this cut is costing the trust fund?

Three questions, can we get some serious answers?

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Should Obama's uncle be deported? He is an illegal and was nailed with a DWI.


Three questions, can we get some serious answers?

No, the whole world would be laughing if we did. Why deport this one man and not deport all others?

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

On the payroll tax cut the GOP wanted to extend the cut for 12 months and the democrats only wanted 2 months. How can the democrats say that the GOP was trying to take money from the taxpayers?

Three questions, can we get some serious answers?

The GOP is always out there to take money from everyone just to give it to the most wealthy people. It has been that way and it will always be that way.

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The payroll tax is our Social Security payment matched by our employer up to $100,000 in income. The talk is about cutting 2% of the 6.2% that we pay which leaves us paying 4.2% for the next two months. Won't this personally bite us in the ass 20-30-40 years from now? As a nation, where do we get the extra $100 billion that this cut is costing the trust fund?

Three questions, can we get some serious answers?

The payroll tax used to be an insurance for retirement income.
That idea is gone forever. So it has nothing to do anymore with future retirement payments.
It is sad but true. If we want to restore payments to future retirement, there are only 2 options.
1 The payments should be held in separate accounts from government and be enough to warrant the guarantees.
2 If they are not enough to guarantee future payments, either the premiums have to go up or the retirement age has to go up.

or 3. Old people have to die more quickly and preferably before they get serious medical expenses.

It is all so simple

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Can the liberals here speak directly to the point without insult, blaming Bush

Since waverunner responded to the three questions, I will respond to the initial question posed by JD in his opening remarks. I have often thought something very similar but I admit to having a slightly different twist.

Can the Far Right-Wing Nuts here speak directly to the point without insult or blaming Obama and/or Clinton?

Just sayin'

[trynagetlaid]

Originally Posted by bigtex

Can the Far Right-Wing Nuts here speak directly to the point without insult or blaming Obama.

Blaming Obama is the only card they have in their deck, all 52 of them.

Eight years of Bush had nothing to do with our present problems.

Obama was handed a four touchdown lead with less than a quarter to play and still managed to get beat on a last-second field goal.

[i'va biggen]

The right thinks anyone who disagrees with their warped thinking is a liberal.they also believe all our financial problems started in 2008.They blame Clinton administration for the housing crisis,but can't explain why Bush didn't change the law if it was flawed in his six years,of total control.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

We are all aware that some of us are right thinking conservatives and other are all feeling liberals but I really am curious about this. Can the liberals here speak directly to the point without insult, ?

Your premise is wrong.

Conservative are not thinkers and liberals feelers.

So I will not resort to insults , you are just ignorant in this matter and I will help educate you , if you take the time. There as been much scientific research in the matter and if you were to purchase Michael Shermer's , "The Believing Brain'' and turn to page 237 you would understand that liberal and conservatives rank 5 moral things in different order. That is not saying one is right or wrong, it is just a fact and explains our different set of beliefs. btw they are:
1) Harm/Care
2)Fairness?reciprocity
3)in-group/loyalty
4)Authority/respect
5)Purity/sanctity


If all you were trying to do was subtle insult, than disregard and go fuc yourself!

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by WTF

Your premise is wrong.

Conservative are not thinkers and liberals feelers.

So I will not resort to insults , you are just ignorant in this matter and I will help educate you , if you take the time. There as been much scientific research in the matter and if you were to purchase Michael Shermer's , "The Believing Brain'' and turn to page 237 you would understand that liberal and conservatives rank 5 moral things in different order. That is not saying one is right or wrong, it is just a fact and explains our different set of beliefs. btw they are:
1) Harm/Care
2)Fairness?reciprocity
3)in-group/loyalty
4)Authority/respect
5)Purity/sanctity


If all you were trying to do was subtle insult, than disregard and go fuc yourself!

You say you won't resort to insults and then you say go fuc yourself. I guess you meant go fuc yourself in a good way.

JD asks the question: "Can liberals here speak directly to the point without insult"

Apparently not.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

You say you won't resort to insults and then you say go fuc yourself. I guess you meant go fuc yourself in a good way.

JD asks the question: "Can liberals here speak directly to the point without insult"

Apparently not.

Apparently you did not notice the ----------><--------- at the end of WTF's sentence. The "fuc yourself! " was merely WTF's subtle attempt to inject a little humor into the dialogue.

Geez, you guys just don't get it. Do you? --------->"Geez, you guys just don't get it. Do you?"<-------- Yet another subtle attempt to inject a little humor into the dialogue!

[CuteOldGuy]

It was an honest mistake. WTF often says one thing, and does another.

[drluv1]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

We are all aware that some of us are right thinking conservatives and other are all feeling liberals but I really am curious about this. Can the liberals here speak directly to the point without insult, blaming Bush, or trying to change the subject about our concerns. Can you make a convincing argument about some of the following topics;

Should Obama's uncle be deported? He is an illegal and was nailed with a DWI.

On the payroll tax cut the GOP wanted to extend the cut for 12 months and the democrats only wanted 2 months. How can the democrats say that the GOP was trying to take money from the taxpayers?

The payroll tax is our Social Security payment matched by our employer up to $100,000 in income. The talk is about cutting 2% of the 6.2% that we pay which leaves us paying 4.2% for the next two months. Won't this personally bite us in the ass 20-30-40 years from now? As a nation, where do we get the extra $100 billion that this cut is costing the trust fund?

Three questions, can we get some serious answers?

I'm from Buffalo, Mathew Barnaby, A canadian and not a US citizen, ex NHL player and ESPN hockey analyst was recently picked up for DWI. He was found driving his Porsche suv without one It's wheels. About 6 mos ago he was found guilty of harassing his ex-wife. He was given probation and community service. the DWI violates his probation and the judge has the option to give him a harsher sentence as well as his DWi sentence. There is some talk that these troubles could get him deported, but our DA is unsure if he will pursue that avenue. My Guess is Barnaby will have sufficient resources to avoid any serious punishment for his crimes and deportation if that issue should arise.
My point is that ANYONE with enough money can manipulate the justice system, but for some reason you single out one person charged with a relatively minor offense.
I think you are mistating the facts when you say the dems "only" wanted a 2 mos extension. The rep wanted to tie a longer extension tied to the oil pipeline from canada, despite questions about the environmental impact of it. Why do REPS hate the environment so much?

I too had the same thought about the impact of the tax cut down the road and honestly don't have good answer. My best answer is that we would be in much better shape if we had republian administrations, from the time of reagan on, that knew had to could balance a budget. The $500 billion a year interest we pay on the $10 trillion amassed under reagan and the 2 bush's is SOOOOOOO productive fo the economy

[CuteOldGuy]

Reps may hate the environment but I don't. We have over 600,000 miles of pipeline in the US now, with nary an environmental problem. I'd like to see the oil come here, rather than China, and I'd like to see the thousands of jobs it would create. I'd like to it keep the refineries in Houston active for at least 30 more years. Why do liberals hate jobs and a good economy so much?

[drluv1]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Reps may hate the environment but I don't. We have over 600,000 miles of pipeline in the US now, with nary an environmental problem. I'd like to see the oil come here, rather than China, and I'd like to see the thousands of jobs it would create. I'd like to it keep the refineries in Houston active for at least 30 more years. Why do liberals hate jobs and a good economy so much?

I didn't research your claim about our pipelines, but my bet would be that it's a mischaracterization. Tell the 70000 people a year that die from air pollution that burning fossil fuels isn't harmful. Oil is a losing proposition for us, we've known this for 40 or 50 years and haven't done nearly enough to secure our energy future.

If you call running huge deficits a good economy, I'd love to know where you got taught economics. It seems to me all our economics system has gotten us over the last 30 years is $14 trillion in debt and THE worst economy since the great depression.
Dems love creating jobs in the environmental sector. It's called "smart growth", maybe you should read up on it.
Please explain why The US economy hasn't been out performing Canada with it's high taxes, onerous regulation and socialized health.care. How many auto jobs have been lost to canada because the auto companies don't have to pay for health insurance there?

[CuteOldGuy]

When did I say running deficits was a good economy? You're as delusional as the others here. Do you deny that more jobs is a good thing? And about the 70,000 people, also not documented, are you saying that if we eliminated all fossil fuels they would all live? We are going to use the oil anyway, so why not save some lives by giving them work, instead of giving it to China, so they can use it to continue to blackmail us.

Smart growth. Like Solyndra? The Fiskars factory in Finland? I don't think so.

You brought up Canada, answer your own damn questions. You like it there, go there. While we're still free. Better hurry.