Will a Romney/Ryan win save us?

[rigney]

I've taken quite a bit of flack because of my inability to answer questions asked of me for statements or questions I myself have made or asked. But in almost all instances questions as such are much more easily asked than answered. This topic alone should get the ground shaking. Being little more than borderline lower middle class citizen myself you might question my reasoning for a leaning to the right. It's simple, I just don't sympathize with socialism bordering on communism. Not to say that a true "ism" in any respect is wrong, it's only that none of them have seemed to turn out right. So, if this Romney-Ryan is a winning ticket, will it bring us a better future or more heartache?

Edited August 14, 2012 by rigney

[swansont]

Save us from what? To what heartache do you refer?

[CaptainPanic]

The Democrats like you have in the USA are NOT socialists.

 

In most European countries, if there would be a political party like the Democrats, with the exact same program, then they would be considered capitalists and right wing. (And the Republicans would be considered extremists).

[rigney]

Save us from what? To what heartache do you refer?

Unemployment, welfare, food stamps, destitude and squalid living conditions and an over extended government. Had a notion you would be waiting! Edited August 14, 2012 by rigney

[Greg H.]

The American political process has ceased being about choice - it is about the illusion of choice and picking the lesser of two evils. I normally vote the fellow that can do the least amount of damage overall.

[rigney]

The Democrats like you have in the USA are NOT socialists.

 

In most European countries, if there would be a political party like the Democrats, with the exact same program, then they would be considered capitalists and right wing. (And the Republicans would be considered extremists).

Since I really don't know much about European politics or living conditions, is either better, equal to or worse than those here in the United states?

[CaptainPanic]

Since I really don't know much about European politics or living conditions, is either better, equal to or worse than those here in the United states?

Living standards over here are pretty similar, I would say. I' ve been across the pond, and I didn't think it was significantly richer on either side.

 

But my main point is that it's just wrong to call the Democrats " socialists". They are not socialist. They're pretty right wing themselves. You just don't have anything on the real left wing.

[Phi for All]

It's simple, I just don't sympathize with socialism bordering on communism.

This right here is a big part of why you get jumped on. You're old enough to remember the Communist scare, and that fear is being used against you. We are NOWHERE NEAR anything like communism in this country, but it's a great place to poke at for you and your generation when the folks in power want you to hate something.

 

Right now in this country, a lot of very successful corporations have spent a lot of money jiggering the political and informational systems in their favor. They got the Telecommunications Act of 1996 passed so they can own the media as well as their other businesses, which protects them from true investigative journalism. They repealed the Glass-Steagall Act that protected our banking system from the kind of speculations that they're now able to do, much to our detriment. They got the Citizens United ruling so now their corporations get treated like People while their corporate charters protect them from the kind of punishment People are kept in line with. And with hundreds of other smaller acts they've been able to make us all believe we're standing on opposite sides of a fence about EVERYTHING, keeping us all very worried about silly things like turning to communism.

 

The multi-national conglomerate corporations own both the Democrats and the Republicans, why on earth would they want the government to be in control of everything and the people all buying state-manufactured goods? Think about it, rigney.

[ydoaPs]

Unemployment, welfare, food stamps, destitude and squalid living conditions and an over extended government. Had a notion you would be waiting!

 

Let's see, they both want to raise your taxes by A LOT to pay for their own tax breaks, they both want to kill off grandma by repealing the Affordable Care Act and effectively killing Medicare, and Paul Ryan voted against all jobs bills and increasing minimum wage (which has actually fallen drastically when inflation is considered). So, if you consider making the rich richer and the poor poorer while trying to kill off the poor and the elderly "saving us", then yes.

[rigney]

The American political process has ceased being about choice - it is about the illusion of choice and picking the lesser of two evils. I normally vote the fellow that can do the least amount of damage overall.

No! We still have a choice, however a slim one. Over the years I've voted both democratic and republican and have been disappointed with each of them. For the salvation of this nation we must find a way of rooting professional politicians out of office. Anything longer than their initial term only tends to make them slier, not better or wiser. We will always need a turnover of blood in government to refresh our stance on liberty, not to perpetuate the stale and greedy system it has become.

 

This right here is a big part of why you get jumped on. You're old enough to remember the Communist scare, and that fear is being used against you. We are NOWHERE NEAR anything like communism in this country, but it's a great place to poke at for you and your generation when the folks in power want you to hate something.

 

Right now in this country, a lot of very successful corporations have spent a lot of money jiggering the political and informational systems in their favor. They got the Telecommunications Act of 1996 passed so they can own the media as well as their other businesses, which protects them from true investigative journalism. They repealed the Glass-Steagall Act that protected our banking system from the kind of speculations that they're now able to do, much to our detriment. They got the Citizens United ruling so now their corporations get treated like People while their corporate charters protect them from the kind of punishment People are kept in line with. And with hundreds of other smaller acts they've been able to make us all believe we're standing on opposite sides of a fence about EVERYTHING, keeping us all very worried about silly things like turning to communism.

 

The multi-national conglomerate corporations own both the Democrats and the Republicans, why on earth would they want the government to be in control of everything and the people all buying state-manufactured goods? Think about it, rigney.

Communism was not a scare tactic but a hard and true fact. How it was presented at times was both shady and shaky, but a fact none the less. And being jumped on means little to me. But being opinionated is an Americans way of life. What we think and how we mentally process these thoughts are ours alone. Many of us don't always make the best or right decisions, and even the fact that we can't always differiante the BS from the truth coming in from all sides, at least it give us some perspective of what not to believe. All I'm saying is: I'm no Manchurian Candidate for either cause and will do legally as I damn well please. Edited August 14, 2012 by rigney

[iNow]

For the majority of citizens in the country, I suggest that Romney/Ryan would make things drastically worse, but many are too deeply influenced by the propaganda and spin to see it. Too many citizens are likely to vote for Romney/Ryan merely for something stupid like they saw a picture of Ryan behind a recently shot buck or because of some blind unfocused unfounded hatred for Obama. They'll do what they're told by the right-wing overlords instead of voting for a good reason like they've actually taken the time to closely review and understand the implications of the Romney/Ryan plans and how that will impact them and their families directly.

Edited August 14, 2012 by iNow

[swansont]

Unemployment, welfare, food stamps, destitude and squalid living conditions and an over extended government. Had a notion you would be waiting!

You mean the unemployment and other problems caused by the collapse that occurred under Bush, exacerbated by failure of congress to do anything about it for the last 2 years? The overextension from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that were started under Bush and not paid for, the tax cuts that were implemented without the corresponding spending cuts? i.e. the Republican problems? How will more of the same save us?

 

As far as socialism goes, it's an argument of distraction. The republicans have repeatedly argued for scaling back the EPA, meaning more pollution that will have to be dealt with by communities. Money saved by companies and the costs transferred to the government. IOW, socialism. Companies want trained workers but do not want to pay for the training themselves, so they are happy to let the government take care of that. IOW, socialism. They want a transportation system to allow them to transport goods and make money, and not have to rely on a limited local labor pool, but do not want to have to build it themselves, so they are happy to let the government do it. IOW, socialism. They want to be protected from backlash of a violent nature, and rely on government-funded police to do so. IOW, socialism.

 

The republicans love socialism when it suits them, but by shouting socialism at the dems, you are meant to not notice this. Same tactic as how Romney's whining about lies and misquotes is meant to distract you from his own campaign's fabrications.

[Phi for All]

Communism was not a scare tactic but a hard and true fact. How it was presented at times was both shady and shaky, but a fact none the less.

I never said it wasn't real THEN, rigney. It was very real, and that's why it works NOW as a scare tactic for the generations that remember when it was a real threat.

 

Can't you see the difference? Communism = BAD so all the corporate-funded pundits have to do is associate communism with socialism (which isn't true either, btw) and then call anything Obama does socialism and BINGO! Suddenly Obama = BAD.

 

We all need to stop being so easy to fool, but mostly you.

[rigney]

For the majority of citizens in the country, I suggest that Romney/Ryan would make things drastically worse, but many are too deeply influenced by the propaganda and spin to see it. Too many citizens are likely to vote for Romney/Ryan merely for something stupid like they saw a picture of Ryan behind a recently shot buck or because of some blind unfocused unfounded hatred for Obama. They'll do what they're told by the right-wing overlords instead of voting for a good reason like they've actually taken the time to closely review and understand the implications of the Romney/Ryan plans and how that will impact them and their families directly.

What amazes me most is how just a few of you get it right all of the time while the rest of us get it wrong. If I was smart enough to have all of those answers in my head, I'd sure be running for something, even if it was nothing more than dog catcher. Edited August 14, 2012 by rigney

[ecoli]

For the majority of citizens in the country, I suggest that Romney/Ryan would make things drastically worse, but many are too deeply influenced by the propaganda and spin to see it. Too many citizens are likely to vote for Romney/Ryan merely for something stupid like they saw a picture of Ryan behind a recently shot buck or because of some blind unfocused unfounded hatred for Obama. They'll do what they're told by the right-wing overlords instead of voting for a good reason like they've actually taken the time to closely review and understand the implications of the Romney/Ryan plans and how that will impact them and their families directly.

 

Right now, Obama gets my vote thanks to Republican rhetoric on social issues. Other than that, I can't see much of a difference.

 

Ok so there's healthcare reform, and while I'm not a supporter on principle I do want to see it play out & with Romney the repeal rhetoric is too strong for my taste.

 

What amazes me most is how just a few of you get it right all of the time while the rest of us get it wrong. If I was smart enough to have all of those answers in my head, I'd sure be running for something, even if it was nothing more than dog catcher.

 

Who is us and them, rigney? You seem to like to play the innocent victim, but this reply contains nothing substantial and doesn't even begin to address iNow's points. Its well demonstrated that people vote based on party brand and vague emotional ideals rather than facts about candidates. Don't you think that this is bad for politics?

[rigney]

Right now, Obama gets my vote thanks to Republican rhetoric on social issues. Other than that, I can't see much of a difference.

 

Ok so there's healthcare reform, and while I'm not a supporter on principle I do want to see it play out & with Romney the repeal rhetoric is too strong for my taste.

 

 

 

Who is us and them, rigney? You seem to like to play the innocent victim, but this reply contains nothing substantial and doesn't even begin to address iNow's points. Its well demonstrated that people vote based on party brand and vague emotional ideals rather than facts about candidates. Don't you think that this is bad for politics?

Hey! Vote for whomever you want. There are no them and us, just people with different opinions and convictions. Have I ever told you how to vote? No! but you, Pie for All, Inow and Swansontea have tried your darndest to convince me how to vote. But when the November elections have termined a winner I will abide by our national decision, just not from folks who believe their principals are the only ones that count. Edited August 14, 2012 by rigney

[ecoli]

Hey! Vote for whomever you want. There are no them and us,

Then you've contradicted yourself.

just a few of you get it right all of the time while the rest of us get it wrong

 

just people with different opinions and convictions. Have I ever told you how to vote? No! but you, Pie for All, Inow and Swansontea have tried your darndest to convince me how to vote.

I'm only gonna speak for myself here, but I've argued my political opinions on here before and I disagree with iNow, et al about as often as you do. But I've never been under the illusion that the purpose of political debate is anything other than to convince the other side that they're wrong. In fact, even to engage in a political debate requires a certain amount of arrogance that you know more than the other side. You've started enough of these threads that I call bullshit that you've "never told you how to vote." You may not have explicitly said: "you should vote for Romney", but you've made enough political threads arguing along conservative lines that its pretty obvious how you want America to vote.

 

But when the November elections have termined a winner I will abide by our national decision, just not from folks who believe their principals are the only ones that count.

Obviously... there's not much else to do.

[john5746]

Well, I would like to see Team Obama propose a budget that has similar deficit amounts as Ryan's. Then we could compare who is cutting what.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/14/fact-check-ryan-budget-plan-doesnt-actually-slash-budget/

 

The Ryan plan really isn't reducing the deficit, so it really shows how tough it will be to even slow the hole digging.

[rigney]

Then you've contradicted yourself.

 

 

 

I'm only gonna speak for myself here, but I've argued my political opinions on here before and I disagree with iNow, et al about as often as you do. But I've never been under the illusion that the purpose of political debate is anything other than to convince the other side that they're wrong. In fact, even to engage in a political debate requires a certain amount of arrogance that you know more than the other side. You've started enough of these threads that I call bullshit that you've "never told you how to vote." You may not have explicitly said: "you should vote for Romney", but you've made enough political threads arguing along conservative lines that its pretty obvious how you want America to vote.

 

 

Obviously... there's not much else to do.

I've made no secret of my distrust and dislike of Obama's politics, bull shit or otherwise. And yes, I believe they border on communism whether you think so or not. If the liberal left can convince enough people to think that way, it's what we will eventually wind up with regardless of whether we think it is for our own good or not. The past three years have convinced me that what I've seen happen is wrong for America.

[ecoli]

I've made no secret of my distrust and dislike of Obama's politics, bull shit or otherwise. And yes, I believe they border on communism whether you think so or not. If the liberal left can convince enough people to think that way, it's what we will eventually wind up with regardless of whether we think it is for our own good or not. The past three years have convinced me that what I've seen happen is wrong for America.

 

So you've contradicted yourself again. You claimed that you aren't trying to convince anyone to vote in a certain way yet here you make overt, charged political statements. You made statements using political divisive terms "us & them", then denied doing it, and are caught here doing it again.

 

It's not that I think your political opinions are unworthy or incorrect, I just don't understand why you can't seem to respond to any comments directly. You respond to specific points with vague political appeals devoid of any facts or stats, and yet act like you're being ganged up on by a non-existent [sFN] liberal conspiracy [- really just calls for data and evidence. Hell, I'm a libertarian so there's probably a lot we can actually agree on].

 

This is a science forum, man, so get it together.

[rigney]

So you've contradicted yourself again. You claimed that you aren't trying to convince anyone to vote in a certain way yet here you make overt, charged political statements. You made statements using political divisive terms "us & them", then denied doing it, and are caught here doing it again.

 

It's not that I think your political opinions are unworthy or incorrect, I just don't understand why you can't seem to respond to any comments directly. You respond to specific points with vague political appeals devoid of any facts or stats, and yet act like you're being ganged up on by a non-existent [sFN] liberal conspiracy [- really just calls for data and evidence. Hell, I'm a libertarian so there's probably a lot we can actually agree on].

 

This is a science forum, man, so get it together.

Will a Romney/Ryan win save us? Rate Topic: #1Today, 09:20 AM rigney Baryon

This is exactly how I started this thread, nothing more or less. Quote: I've taken quite a bit of flack because of my inability to answer questions asked of me for statements or questions I myself have made or asked. But in almost all instances questions as such are much more easily asked than answered. This topic alone should get the ground shaking. Being little more than borderline lower middle class citizen myself you might question my reasoning for a leaning to the right. It's simple, I just don't sympathize with socialism bordering on communism. Not to say that a true "ism" in any respect is wrong, it's only that none of them have seemed to turn out right. So, if this Romney-Ryan is a winning ticket, will it bring us a better future or more heartache?Unquote: Can there be a plainer way to ask a simple question?

[ecoli]

It doesn't bother you that you aren't able to support your opinions with actual facts?

 

You actually allude to my point in that none of the isms have turned out to be right. Well, 'right' by what metric by what evidence?

 

In fact, I don't find your question plain or simple at all. I find it vague, unclear and complex (how much "better" and better for whom?).

[Arete]

And yes, I believe they border on communism whether you think so or not.

 

I'll start with the fact that I am not eligible to vote in the US election, so don't have a dog in the fight, so to speak, but:

 

You can believe a ladder is bucket all you like, but it doesn't make the ladder a bucket.

 

communism has a definition:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

http://dictionary.re...rowse/communism

"a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state."

 

As does socialism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

http://dictionary.re...rowse/socialism

"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."

 

The policies of the United States Democratic Party are not describable as either communist or socialist under standard definitions of those political ideologies. You can say that you disagree with their policies for reasons x, y and z, but to simply state you don't like the healthcare bill or the taxation policy simply because it is "socialistic" or "communistic" is incorrect, and to do so after repeated correction does make you appear ignorant. It would be more conducive to discussion to point out actual differences in policies between the two parties and explain why you prefer one to the other, or even point out why both are inadequate...

 

E.g. http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Health_Care.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/republican_party_health_care.htm

 

point out what you like and don't like about each, perhaps?

[Moontanman]

So, if this Romney-Ryan is a winning ticket, will it bring us a better future or more heartache?Unquote: Can there be a plainer way to ask a simple question?

 

 

More heart ache, no doubt... Worse future no doubt... Seriously rigney, the only serious difference between the two tickets is that one is supporting someone who is demostrably either stupid or a liar.

 

The Romney ticket actually endorses creationism, both him and his running mater are so far out of contact with reality they think the earth is 6,000 years old, they think evolution is just a "theory", abstinence is the only birth control that can be allowed, and they want to teach the controversy... If this is not what they think then they are clearly liars, if they do then they are clearly stupid... either way they are endorsing ideas that are demonstrably wrong...

 

Romney's supporters have over and over asserted that removing the rights of individuals based on nothing but the religious views written down in a 2500 year old book is the right thing to do. This book is clearly wrong about so much stuff that what little it says that cannot be confirmed is in serious doubt.

 

They want to rule our contry and restrict the rights of it's citizens based on this book The fact they support more deregulation of banks is not surprising considering they are stupid or liars. Obama might not be much better but he does have 4 years experience in the job and is not so stupid he has no concept of reality...

 

And Obama does not want to use a system of deregulation and top down economics that is clearly not working, even though it has had nearly free reign for decades...

 

Now if you were looking at replacing a man whose ideas you didn't like but you knew his replacement, by his own words, was either stupid or a liar which one would you choose?

Edited August 14, 2012 by Moontanman

[Greg H.]

Now if you were looking at replacing a man whose ideas you didn't like but you knew his replacement, by his own words, was either stupid or a liar which one would you choose?

 

Better the devil you know is, I believe, how the saying goes.