>> ^bobknight33:

That's what Obama said. His plan would cut your bill. WRONG.
Obama will get his monkey spanked on election day. The press will cry foul and the Obama media will blame it on "white raciest". There will be riots in the streets by the brothers and sisters feeding on the media lies that will be propagated by Ed Schultz and the rest of MSNBC. OWS will help with the riots since they have nothing better to do.
Netrunner will be crying


Nah man, even with Romneys bump in the polls it's pretty obvious who's going to win.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Ah yes, Roosevelt, the rich guy posing as a common man, sworn enemy of individual rights, private property and economic liberty, whose policies prolonged the Depression, enormously increased debt, compromised the Supreme Court and whose ass was only saved by the US entering World War II.


During World War 2 the country became increasingly fascist...the good old days right?

Ah yes, Roosevelt, the rich guy posing as a common man, sworn enemy of individual rights, private property and economic liberty, whose policies prolonged the Depression, enormously increased debt, compromised the Supreme Court and whose ass was only saved by the US entering World War II.

>> ^renatojj:

That's how the media, left and right, treated him for the entirety of his campaign. Any respect and coverage he got was inversely proportional to his perceived chance of winning.


...And so it goes, each election more absurd than the next until who knows? Maybe some new, "New Deal" after all the cocka-roaches are gone, calling up the depressed Roosevelt-styley to help rebuild the infrastructure? I for one, hope it includes a beautification of the entire United States in the form of razing every strip-center and billboard for starters.
This includes my first act in office, criminalizing inherently evil entities too big for their britches like Walmart and Monsanto, and razing THEIR improvements on real estate assets while demanding the offspring of their CEO's to walk naked with sandwich board signs on a remote mangrove swamp with mock city streets resembling their home-towns, filled with CCTV cameras with a live feed for folks around the world to deride them for all eternity, amen.

I wish Republicans would change the name of their party. They have nothing in common with the party of Abe Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt. Maybe they could resurrect the name "The Know-Nothing Party".

http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/media_content/m-2445.jpg

That's where you're wrong, Eric Winston. I only watch football for the injuries (aka, I don't watch it, I watch webclips), just like I only watch hockey matches for the fights; just like I only watch car races for the crashes. It's, arguably, human nature to be in awe of a horrific spectacle, and it's the same with being swept up in what the crowd is feeling.

But, let's call a spade a spade here. Football was born as a sport where people were injured or died as a result of playing the game. It was only after Roosevelt intervened that the sport changed into what one of my students lost his short term memory to.

Ever crouch down and ram your head at something with the full force of your body?
Why are injuries like this surprising?
Why does he act like he's not participating/supporting a sport that systematically abuses players for a profit?
Why the outrage over cheering an injury but the support of the system that throws people into situations that make injuries like this likely?

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles..."

It's not that Cenk is wrong about voting for McCain, that was just another Pandora's Box to be had at the table. I feel while John would "maybe" try to end this issue, as we've seen his past his stance changes from one way to the other when push comes to shove (gays in the military) he would still end up doing some if not most of the core Republican "threats". Which may mean that if it came down to the wire some sort of "law deal" would be made with house Republicans and they would force John to change his mind. I know John had a law on the books that got railroaded by this Citizens United fiasco--so he may have some actual flesh in the fight. I just need to see him commit/fight first before I believe the words.

But, anyway, you'd have to remember we'd have to deal with the pure drivel of his right hand...The Dumbass From Alaska: Sarah Palin! I'd like to say McCain was OK, he seemed fine circa 2000, but with the state of politics--no offense to Cenk as I think he's a smart guy--but I DON'T trust a damned word coming from ANY of their mouths. They say things TO GET PRESS COVERAGE for hells sake (but, this deserves press coverage)!!! So, yes, I think John is getting a hardy pass to "Go" here when he may not deserve it; John should have already made his move on the issue--if he has done more than introduce his old bill and disagree with the Citizens vs. United, that is all that I know he really did. He passed a law dealing with the subject so I'd assume he has a stake in it somewhere, it just hasn't been made all that clear--it's just talking for now (I'm going to go look for a bit myself as well, to see if I can find more direct maneuvers that he has done either against Citizens United or his bill that was ran over).

Obama talked a great talk, but we knew after two years we didn't get anything remotely close to a revolutionary or visionary president here--let alone progressive (the last progressive probably was Roosevelt to be truthful, I don't think Reagan or Clinton count at all, they just towed in the party lines and left partisanship, unchecked, to take a bigger hold in American politics and they both did a good job for THEIR parties), just a McPresident™ fully endorsed by: [list your 1000 companies here]. Obama is playing his cards close to the middle (not to the far left like oh so many think). I hate the Citizens United Decision and I'm astounded it hasn't been slapped down yet as it LITERALLY allows foreign interests to play with our politics--not funny. Just the business end of it is spooky enough. I hate Obama for a lot of issues, but just because one guy that diametrically opposes everything else he says has one VERY valid point I'm not going to take him on his offer until he commits to the point where his words cannot be swung 180 degrees. I'm betting that even now Sarah Palin thinks the Citizens United decision is either about people getting together to have a party or she thinks it's great; so really she likes it no matter what.

Imagine being in Iran right now, over having Citizens United resolved in the name of 'The People', instead we'd probably get a declaration of a third war instead--we could play this stupid game all day. I'd rather be disappointed in my president and wait for the courts to settle it, if they can--we can all thank Bush Junior for his absolute garbage taste in Justices...

I'm not a fan of John or Obama that much, but I WILL take Obama any-day over a Republican--right now in our current political climate; Republicans are toxic. Personally, I think John's main involvement does go back to the law he passed in 2002 for campaign finance reform. That of course was on the books when Citizens United came about and forced them to take that law into account and the prevailing Justices basically just sneered at it as they seemed to have a malicious view of the other side as their responses gave that away. They were snide and sarcastic in a matter which is neither, except to them--so did they get paid off? I'm thinking, somehow, YES, they did. I'm assuming someone cares at the level of government, it is getting harder to tell every year. Obama certainly doesn't help that issue. I really don't think John would have either, he may have saved us on finance reform for elections--electioneering--but, he would have enacted so many ridiculously TERRIBLE laws in place of the ONE bad law that we'd cry for our country. Plus, we might be in Iran considering the level of vitriolic talk from him and Sarah...

Rolling the dice with World War 3 looming...



That is the one thing that MAY keep John on your side throughout all of this as he did try the first time to try and sway their opinion and he also had an old law on the books that dealt with some of the issues presented.

>> ^Sweetjimmy:

Even if you don't agree with the man, he is by FAR the coolest President these United States has seen.


teddy roosevelt would like to have a word with you

Just some history of the 2 parties......Setting aside the fact the the KKK was formed by the all inclusive tent of the Democrats...to scare the southern brother who remained Republican up until the 60s.



The Democratic Party was formed in 1792, when supporters of Thomas Jefferson began using the name Republicans, or Jeffersonian Republicans, to emphasize its anti-aristocratic policies. It adopted its present name during the Presidency of Andrew Jackson in the 1830s. In the 1840s and '50s, the party was in conflict over extending slavery to the Western territories. Southern Democrats insisted on protecting slavery in all the territories while many Northern Democrats resisted. The party split over the slavery issue in 1860 at its Presidential convention in Charleston, South Carolina.

Northern Democrats nominated Stephen Douglas as their candidate, and Southern Democrats adopted a pro-slavery platform and nominated John C. Breckinridge in an election campaign that would be won by Abraham Lincoln and the newly formed Republican Party. After the Civil War, most white Southerners opposed Radical Reconstruction and the Republican Party's support of black civil and political rights.
The Democratic Party identified itself as the "white man's party" and demonized the Republican Party as being "Negro dominated," even though whites were in control. Determined to re-capture the South, Southern Democrats "redeemed" state after state -- sometimes peacefully, other times by fraud and violence. By 1877, when Reconstruction was officially over, the Democratic Party controlled every Southern state.

The South remained a one-party region until the Civil Rights movement began in the 1960s. Northern Democrats, most of whom had prejudicial attitudes towards blacks, offered no challenge to the discriminatory policies of the Southern Democrats.
One of the consequences of the Democratic victories in the South was that many Southern Congressmen and Senators were almost automatically re-elected every election. Due to the importance of seniority in the U.S. Congress, Southerners were able to control most of the committees in both houses of Congress and kill any civil rights legislation. Even though Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat, and a relatively liberal president during the 1930s and '40s, he rarely challenged the powerfully entrenched Southern bloc. When the House passed a federal anti-lynching bill several times in the 1930s, Southern senators filibustered it to death.

Link

>> ^VoodooV:

proof that conservatives will put aside their supposed morality at the drop of a hat just to oppose a black man



So who is opposing the Black Man? Which party enslaves the Black Man today? Democrats use the welfare system which keeps many enslaved into poverty. Republicans want to help those get out and become free men and women to make free choices for themselves.

If you give a man a fish you feed him for a day. If you teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime. Democrats want to feed the poor fish-sticks. Republicans want to teach how to fish.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot." --Henry Morgenthau, Jr., U.S. Secretary of the Treasury during the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt

The myth of FDR is the edifice on which the modern welfare state wobbles.




>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
So what did FDR do, exactly? If big biz (that old reliable satan of the left) really "controlled" government then all FDR did was make government bigger and more tyrannical, and to this day the left claims big biz still runs it.
FDR's antics extended the Depression. "High tariffs and government-sponsored deflation followed by enormous taxation and unthinkable government expenditures turned a stock market stumble into a decade-long nightmare."
Obama's cut from the same fictive cloth, a dragon pretending to be dragonslayer.

These statements are from a reputable historian or economist I take it?

American's have felt this way for a while, going back to at least the Spanish American War, and Teddy Roosevelt and his expansive foriegn policy. In other times we called this attitude the "white man's burden".

The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote?

Nowhere does it state in the text of the column that voting is to be restricted for anyone, only that stupid, uninformed voters may be the end of the Republic.

Civil war? May happen anyway.



>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.
"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.
"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.
"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.
"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."

Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "

The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote? I'd consider what the long term effects of that were before chasing that dream if i were you. You might find yourself either in a civil war or at the helm of an oppressive government in effect holding half a nation prisoner.
Democratic government was founded upon the mindless whims of the masses, it is supposed to be subject to the national will.
And now it serves the mindless whims of the few. Up with Occupy.

>> ^quantumushroom:

"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.
"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.
"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.
"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.
"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."

Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "


The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote? I'd consider what the long term effects of that were before chasing that dream if i were you. You might find yourself either in a civil war or at the helm of an oppressive government in effect holding half a nation prisoner.

Democratic government was founded upon the mindless whims of the masses, it is supposed to be subject to the national will.

And now it serves the mindless whims of the few. Up with Occupy.

"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.

"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.

"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.

"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.

"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."



Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "