What Is Americas Biggest Problem?

[Willie71]

Overtone,You keep playing the race card, as if republicans that want to repeal Obamacare are doing it because they can't stand that Obama put a black hand on the bible. There are people like that, I have no doubt. I am not one of them. There are good ole boys driving pickups with confederate flags, sure. But they have an equal vote as you do.An equal vote.If they elect a representative that will respect the life of an unborn fetus, or honor the institution of marriage between a man and a woman, or that will work to keep drugs from coming into the county through our border with Mexico, or ask that we not both allow people to work in this country that have overstayed their visas, and allow them to take advantage of our social programs, they must have been helped in the voting, by people who wanted to see those policy objectives, that did NOT even have a pick-up, much less a confederate flag on it. It is not, absolutely not your right to tell the guy he can not fly the confederate flag. Nor are you anywhere near correct to assume that because he is a bigot, that I must be, because I voted for Bush, years before the last 7 years were even envisioned.I have voted for both republicans and democrats for president, and over the last 7 years I have voted for both republicans and democrats for local office, state legislator positions, and for members of the U.S. house and senate. You don't know which of those choices of mine put a bigot into office or kept one out.Certain democrats ALWAYS vote against the rich, against business, against the military, against big oil. The black vote goes almost always to the democrats. The democrats almost always go for policies that would increase government transfer payments to black people and single moms of any color, and the poor, and children and the elderly, provided one does not have the means to provide the good or service to their own family. The taxes that would pay for the programs are paid for by the people that are NOT getting the transfer payments. Someone that works and saves and pays taxes can live next to someone in West Virginia who has better medical coverage, more food on the table, college paid for and be in a better position financially than the gal that is working.Are black people all dependent wards of the state, that only could possibly vote for someone that will take care of them, with white people's money?Maybe. as Maybe as it is that I vote the way I vote, because I am a bigot or a dupe.If a businessman votes to lower his taxes, and a person receiving transfer payments (welfare, foodstamps, free healthcare, disability, medicade, medicare,) votes to increase their transfer payments, then two sides have been chosen. The givers and the takers. If you are suggesting that in order to be a giver, you have to be a rich white bigot, then you are likewise saying that in order to be a democrat you must be a taker.Regards, TARTen Oz,For the purposes of this thread, ISIS can not both be a problem for America, and not a problem for America.It matters not, what will work best to defeat them, or what will swell their ranks or lessen their ranks, or whether Bush or Clinton or Bush or Obama pissed off the republican guard, or the Iran guard the most.The real fact is that ISIS is a problem and we don't want them on the planet with us.Or that ISIS is not a problem and we should let them establish a caliphate.They cannot though be both a big problem and not a problem.Regards, TARI personally choose to think of Obama as half white, and I feel toward him as I did toward a half white, half black female gay soldier I befriended in the Army. She was gay because she did not want to have a child that would have to go through what she is going through, getting the hate from the whites for being half black, and the hate from the blacks for being half white.that is exactly my point in this threadgive the other person the benefit of the doubt, and love the half of them that is you and do not hate the half of them that is notevery time I mention this understanding of reality and request tolerance and understanding, someone comes up with a reason to hate republicansReally? And I have not won this argument 100 times already?

This has no factual information in it. There are a bunch of republican talking points, some racism, and a total ignorance of homosexuality.

 

Re:Isis: the republican candidates:Isis is so scary, I shit my pants! No, I shit my pants more! No, I shit my pants even more than you! Applause, applause, applause!!!!! Let's commit war crimes, carpet bomb, bring back torture! What about the ticking time bomb? (Doesn't exist.) can you believe Hillary, and her e-mails!? How illegal!!!! How unamerican!

Edited February 8, 2016 by Willie71

[overtone]

You keep playing the race card, as if republicans that want to repeal Obamacare are doing it because they can't stand that Obama put a black hand on the bible. There are people like that, I have no doubt. I am not one of them. There are good ole boys driving pickups with confederate flags, sure. But they have an equal vote as you do.

No one has ever claimed that the racial bigots and religious fundies and reactionary assholes that make up the voting base of the current Republican Party do not or should not have a vote. We all agree that those people are citizens and have the right to vote.

 

Nobody ever said any different. Got it? Is that clear enough for you? We all agree that these people have all the rights of citizens in good standing. Nobody has argued any different. Nobody. Ever.

 

 

Are black people all dependent wards of the state, that only could possibly vote for someone that will take care of them, with white people's money?

Maybe. as Maybe as it is that I vote the way I vote, because I am a bigot or a dupe.

 

Except, as always with your claims and assertions, there is a reality involved. We can check on whether black people are all dependent wards of the State, for example. The answer is no. And we never thought they were. And there is no particular reason the subject should have come up - nobody else is talking about anything like that. It's a bit odd, don't you think?

 

We can also check on where the white people's money is going, and verify that most of it is going to other white people. Just as we thought.

 

We can also, although with less certainty, check on whether your claims are based in bigotry and/or being duped. And here your many, many errors of historical fact and frequent racial focus in anecdotes are evidence. They are not conclusive, but they are evidence. If you are not being duped, where are you getting your false claims and assertions? Why does race play so large a role? Are you making them up yourself, and their consistent agreement with the barrage of propaganda and falsehoods from the centers of rightwing authoritarian bullshit currently marketing the Republican Party to the gullible is a coincidence? That's hard to believe.

 

Agreement with what agrees with physical reality can easily be coincidence, because that reality is the same for all - a common source is visible. But agreement in error and delusion is evidence of a different kind of common source - not reality.

 

 

every time I mention this understanding of reality and request tolerance and understanding, someone comes up with a reason to hate republicans

Really? And I have not won this argument 100 times already?

Once again, as so many times before: your obsession with hatred of persons is a symptom, and an indication. You have repeated it so often, and in the face of so much careful explanation, that we are fully justified in taking it as evidence of your political stance and ideology and sources of opinion.

 

I don't know what argument you think you've won, but by the evidence you have no idea what's wrong with the current Republican Party, or why it is a problem for America. You don't even know what it's been doing, or what it did in years past. If you can't think of any reason to regard the Republican Party as a threat to America except hatred for the people who call themselves "republicans", you're a dupe.

 

So with that in mind: my assertion, that you are ostensibly responding to, is that the current Republican Party is America's biggest problem. Reasons have been posted, the argument made.

Edited February 8, 2016 by overtone

[tar]

Overtone,

 

Someone else played the race card, I reversed my earlier request to talk about West Virginia dependency so we could talk about dependency without being bigots, when I mentioned that black people vote democrat 80 percent of the time. There must be a reason for this. I suggested it natural and normal for people to vote for the programs that would leave the most money in their pockets, and I characterized the democrats as running on progressive platforms, that would tax the rich and give transfer payments to the disenfranchised.

 

I am way outvoted, and everybody loved your proof that I am either a bigot or dupe.

 

Except I am neither and still republican.

 

If this thread was entitled, who is a bigger problem in America, then Republicans would think Democrats and Democrats would think Republicans. If you were to ask me, whose policies do I normally side with, I would say it was a mix, but I tend to be more management, than union in my thinking, and would side with the boss, before I would side with the striker. I tend to side more with the policeman who gets shot in his patrol car, than with the shooter. I once was eliminated during jury selection because I answered I would take the word of a police officer over the defendant. These things, might make me conservative, or even republican, but do not make be a bigot.

 

If the thread question was who would you vote for in a Cruz, Sanders election, I would tell you Sanders, even though I don't think his plan workable, because I would rather a reasonable person that was a socialist, than a reasonable person who was a fascist. But I do not call all democrats communists and you call the republican party dangerous. Because there are bigots and nationists, and rich people in it.

 

Looking up the civil rights movement on Wiki, they mention that one of the detractors was a strong segregationist from Virginia, a Democrat. Must you automatically assume a segregationist position, if you are to pull the Democrat lever?

 

No, the thread question is not should you be a bigot, or should you be tolerant, the thread question is what is the biggest problem in America.

If the answer is intolerance. Then I win the argument. Because it is your intolerance of me, that is your constant drone.

If the answer is rich people, then I would argue that rich people are not a problem, they have been, are and will be the main strength of a prosperous nation.

If the answer is white people, then I would argue that 70 percent of the nation, can not be the problem with the nation.

If the answer is males, then I would argue that 50 percent of the nation, can not be the biggest problem with the nation.

If the answer is religious people that are proven to be ignorant of facts, then I would argue that the most of us are religious, or humanist, or otherwise guided by spirituality or an image of an unseen other that we do not wish to disappoint, and that having a belief, can therefore not be the biggest problem with the nation

.

 

If the answer is Bush and Reagan, I would remind you that that is the past, and at the time, they were my commanders in chief and the leaders of my country. Whatever they did, they did in my name. Same for now. Whatever Obama does, he does in my name. He is a pragmatic leader, one I am most often proud of, and always respectful of. It does not mean I can not disagree with his politics. I can disagree with him now, on Obamacare, as you disagreed with Bush on Iraq, and neither one of us is automatically a traitor. I agreed with trickle down economics. That makes me a republican. Not a bigot.

 

I don't expect to prove to you, that the conservative stance is correct and the progressive stance, incorrect. How could I? You are a progressive. All I can prove, is that I can have a stance, and do it on some other basis than being a problem to America. A problem to a progressive, if I am not one, sure. A problem to a socialist, if I am not one, sure. A greedy capitalist to a staving peasant, sure. But not a problem to America.

 

The problem in America is party line voting, like somehow every complex issue, instead of requiring debate and consensus and careful judgement and brilliant thinking and point by point consideration, is already decided by the label on the package, and everybody smart should vote the party line.

 

I am talking about being considerate of trucks on the highway, and giving them a lane to accelerate before the hill, and you are telling me that driving a car is killing the planet.t

 

But any argument I would make against a policy either republican or democrat, would not be against America. It would be against the policy and for America.

 

You can feel good, that you put a bigot in his place, and now you have won.

 

But I would argue that my being a bigot, was never the argument.

My argument is that we spend too much time trying to prove the other wrong, so that we can feel right, rather than looking for the ways in which we can both be right.

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

Separate, but related:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/republicans-support-obamas-health-reforms--as-long-as-his-name-isnt-on-them/2012/06/25/gJQAq7E51V_blog.html?tid=a_inl

The new Reuters-Ipsos poll finds that Obamacare remains deeply unpopular; 56 percent of Americans oppose the law, versus only 44 percent who favor it. The poll also finds that strong majorities of Americans favor the individual provisions in the law -- the hated individual mandate excepted, of course.

 

What’s particularly interesting about this poll is that solid majorities of Republicans favor most of the law’s main provisions, too.

(snip)

* Eighty percent of Republicans favor “creating an insurance pool where small businesses and uninsured have access to insurance exchanges to take advantage of large group pricing benefits.” That’s backed by 75 percent of independents.

 

* Fifty-seven percent of Republicans support “providing subsidies on a sliding scale to aid individuals and families who cannot afford health insurance.” That’s backed by 67 percent of independents.

 

* Fifty-four percent of Republicans favor “requiring companies with more than 50 employees to provide insurance for their employers.” That’s backed by 75 percent of independents.

 

* Fifty two percent of Republicans favor “allowing children to stay on parents insurance until age 26.” That’s backed by 69 percent of independents.

 

* Seventy eight percent of Republicans support “banning insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions; 86 percent of Republicans favor “banning insurance companies from cancelling policies because a person becomes ill.” Those are backed by 82 percent of independents and 87 percent of independents.

 

* One provision that isn’t backed by a majority of Republicans: The one “expanding Medicaid to families with incomes less than $30,000 per year.”

 

“Most Republicans want to have good health coverage,” Ipsos research director Chris Jackson tells me. “They just don’t necessarily like what it is Obama is doing.”

 

I’d add that Republicans and independents favor regulation of the health insurance system in big numbers. But the law has become so defined by the individual mandate — not to mention Obama himself — that public sentiment on the reforms themselves has been entirely drowned out. It’s another sign of the conservative messaging triumph in this fight

Narrative over facts, FTW!

[tar]

Overtone,

 

So I concede the argument. You win. The republicans are problems to the people on this board. No argument.

 

But I will retain the thought, my main point, that being problems to each other is the main problem in America today. I am not a problem to myself, or a problem with America, and in that sense, I won the thread argument, the moment you called me either an idiot or a dupe for voting republican.

 

Regards, TAR

[Phi for All]

Overtone,

 

So I concede the argument. You win. The republicans are problems to the people on this board. No argument.

 

But I will retain the thought, my main point, that being problems to each other is the main problem in America today. I am not a problem to myself, or a problem with America, and in that sense, I won the thread argument, the moment you called me either an idiot or a dupe for voting republican.

 

Regards, TAR

 

You just keep holding on to that integrity-preserver. You can't sink as long as you pretend it works!

Narrative over facts, FTW!

 

And as tar has repeatedly demonstrated in this thread, the narrative can't be refuted because it becomes sacred to the conservatives. Once heard, and accepted through confirmation bias, facts bounce off the false narrative and it becomes Truth to the conservatives. You start listing facts to refute a trivially false point, and their eyes glaze over and they start chanting the narrative mantra.

 

It makes them so gullible and goofy. And scary since this inanity is so widespread. And reinforced. And well-funded.

[tar]

iNow,

 

We could have extended medicaid to people under 30,000 without any attempt at all, at universal healthcare. And why not 20,000 or 50,000?

 

What about the guy making 29,500 that works overtime. Does he loose his healthcare benefits?

th

Laws need principles behind them. Sensible principles, where even if the letter of the law makes no sense, you can still follow it, because you know the principle behind it.

 

Obamacare is what he proudly calls it himself, so let me use the word, without you incorrectly assuming I have some hatred for the man, based on the color of the skin of one of his parents.

Obamacare has fines for not buying insurance. They go up every year you don't have insurance. This is so the base of premium payers is large enough to pay for everybody's claims. This is of course after paying a premium, paying a deductible and then a percentage of your health care costs, depending on whether you have paid for bronze or gold, up to a particular ceiling, after which you will not be bankrupted by long hospital stays or expensive drugs or procedures. Fines are up this year to maybe 2.5 percent of your salary. You might as well just pay for your doctors visits with this money, or buy your own insurance. The fine has one purpose. To make young people, that are not worried about being sick, pay, so the system has more money to cover the aged. We already have Medicaid, and medicare, so these concerns could be directly addressed in social programs already in place...if we can find the money and the will to pay for them.

 

Making employers provide healthcare is just a shell game. Where are you going to get the money to buy insurance anyway? From your salary. Where does your salary come from? Your employer. They are already paying for your doctors visits, whether you pay the doctor out of pocket, or through the insurance company. Either you or your employer has to pay the premiums to the insurance companies. If I have any objections to the Affordable Care Act, it is because I have to figure out, who to pay what, and where to get my plan, and which doctors are in and out of network and such. It is a mess because it is a combination of "the government is going to pay" and "the insurance company is going to pay" and "you are going to pay (in taxes or premiums or out of pocket)" and the employer is going to pay (through increasing your salary, or minimum wage, or by being forced to cover you and pay premiums, or by increased taxes on corporations to pay the freight)

 

My objections are purely sensible. What works, and what is fair. It has nothing to do with being a bigot. If you think voting against extending Medicaid to people under 30K means you are a bigot, then that likewise means that you think everybody under 30K is black.

 

Regards, TAR

Phi,

 

Yes. I will hold on to my integrity. I have it. And I will keep it.

 

You know yourself Obamacare is not working. Your answer is to go to a socialized medicine model.

 

If that is going to work, then prove it to congress and we will vote it in.

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

iNow,

 

We could have extended medicaid to people under 30,000 without any attempt at all, at universal healthcare. And why not 20,000 or 50,000?

 

What about the guy making 29,500 that works overtime. Does he loose his healthcare benefits?

Yes, why again didn't that occur? Why wasn't Medicated extended in the way you suggest? Gosh, we may never know...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/millions-will-remain-uninsured-because-of-blocked-medicaid-expansion-in-states/2013/11/15/9629bcfa-4b1c-11e3-be6b-d3d28122e6d4_story.html

a factor that the law’s authors couldn’t foresee was Republican intransigence combined with last year’s Supreme Court ruling. The justices proclaimed that states could opt out of an expansion of Medicaid, a partnership between states and the federal government that provides health care to poor people. The law aimed to cover a larger percentage of low-income people by raising Medicaid’s eligibility limits across the country, with the federal government paying for nearly all of the cost. It was a bargain that no state leader should have passed up. Yet Republican politicians have blocked Medicaid expansion in half the states.

 

Their refusal is going to have just the result that the attack ad rails against — millions will remain uninsured, and in states with some of the highest rates of poor uninsured people, such as Texas, Florida and Georgia. Many who should have been eligible to obtain Medicaid coverage won’t qualify for government help to buy insurance on the marketplaces that have begun to operate around the country. The law’s authors assumed that Medicaid would take care of them. In an analysis separate from the CBO’s, the Kaiser Family Foundation last month calculated that about 5 million adults will fall into this “coverage gap.” Another recent Kaiser study found that impoverished people in the South and people of color will be hurt the most.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/25/us/states-policies-on-health-care-exclude-poorest.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

The refusal by about half the states to expand Medicaid will leave millions of poor people ineligible for government-subsidized health insurance under President Obama’s health care law even as many others with higher incomes receive federal subsidies to buy insurance.

(snip)

But the Supreme Court ruled last year that the expansion was an option for states, not a requirement. At least 25 states — mainly those with Republican governors or Republican-controlled legislatures — have balked at expanding the program (snip) Several Republican governors, like Rick Scott in Florida, wanted to expand Medicaid, but met resistance from state legislators.

See also: http://kff.org/health-reform/state-indicator/state-activity-around-expanding-medicaid-under-the-affordable-care-act/

 

The consequence of this ideological intransigence? Lots of people dead for no good reason: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2014/01/30/opting-out-of-medicaid-expansion-the-health-and-financial-impacts/

[tar]

Phi,

 

For the purposes of the thread title, perhaps you can enumeratYe the "people like me".

 

Count them up.

 

If they are a majority of the nation, then perhaps I am OK in siding with them as fellow citizens.

 

And if its just the rich and powerful fooling everybody into compliance, then, not being rich and powerful, I don't have any choice in the matter.

 

Anybody more intelligent than I am could fool me, pretty much all the time, if they wanted to. I choose to live as if they do not want to fool me. And I give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

You are the one afraid of America. I am the one arguing that we are 90% good people.

 

Interesting to me, in this argument, that Overtone is basing her hatred on decisions made during the Gulf war and the Iraq invasion or whatever in the past, and you are basing your hatred on our inability to enter the shiny new social democratic Utopia of Phi for All, yet it is me that ignores reality.

 

Regards, TAR

[Phi for All]

If that is going to work, then prove it to congress and we will vote it in.

 

The best proof won't be listened to, not by you, because it comes from other countries, and you conservatives don't trust them. They make it work, but you can't imagine we could. You think poorly of Americans, but I understand because you are a member of the Republican Party, and your critical skills are pathetic.

 

Using public funds to make Medicare available to all would cost us less than what we pay now. It would do away with the idea of insurance for our health, put you and your doctors in charge of your health, and focus on keeping us healthy. But you don't listen to that (I can already hear you thinking of some meaningless, idiotic anecdote). You repeat the same ignorance over and over, ignoring everyone trying to show you facts. You can't seem to understand why lots of big businesses don't want you to mess with the fucked up way they've got things working in their favor, nor why it's important that we fix the fucked up part.

 

I think you're a horrible spokesperson for our country, and I'm ashamed there are so many of you.

[Ten oz]

Overtone,Someone else played the race card, I reversed my earlier request to talk about West Virginia dependency so we could talk about dependency without being bigots, when I mentioned that black people vote democrat 80 percent of the time. There must be a reason for this. I suggested it natural and normal for people to vote for the programs that would leave the most money in their pockets, and I characterized the democrats as running on progressive platforms, that would tax the rich and give transfer payments to the disenfranchised.

Multiple posters have already gone over the history of the "Southern strategy" (with citation) and the way the Republican Party used it to secure Goerge Wallace's racist supporters. Have you considered that the reason the majority of blacks vote democrat is because most are not comfortable voting shoulder to shoulder with the racist element within the Republican party? That is why all the former leaders of the civil rights movement are democrat today as well. Their radar for bigotry is more finally tuned than your seems to be. When you have high profile mouth pieces like Rush Limbaugh calling Obama "the magic negro" and Glenn Beck saying Obama "hates white people" it really shouldn't be a wonder as to why blacks do not support the Republican Party.

 

To be 100% honest I suspect you do understand why blacks vote Democrat but still posted your nonsense anyway because part of you feels empowered by insulting groups which you aren't part of which is why you have insulted blacks, Muslims, gays, and etc in your various posts.

 

These things, might make me conservative, or even republican, but do not make be a bigot.

No disagreement here. Who you vote for doesn't make you a bigot TAR. The plainly racist things you post are what make you a bigot.

 

Looking up the civil rights movement on Wiki, they mention that one of the detractors was a strong segregationist from Virginia, a Democrat. Must you automatically assume a segregationist position, if you are to pull the Democrat lever?

George Wallace was a Democrat!!!! We have been over and over this. The bigot pro segregationists left/revolted from the Democrat party.

 

I can disagree with him now, on Obamacare, as you disagreed with Bush on Iraq, and neither one of us is automatically a traitor.

OMG!!!! Those are equivalents to you?

 

I don't expect to prove to you, that the conservative stance is correct and the progressive stance, incorrect. How could I?

With facts, provide facts that support your conclusions rather than unrelated stories about some nubleous thing you saw while shopping.

 

But any argument I would make against a policy either republican or democrat, would not be against America. It would be against the policy and for America.

This is a meaningless statement. You are acting as if all roads lead to the same place or that decisions/choices are consequence fear. Bad policy can hurt the country. You think people drinking lead in Michigan view their situation as a frivolous policy dispute?

 

]

[tar]

Phi,

 

States opting out included elections held to elect the governors that would want to opt out.

 

Same kind of thing might happen with BernieU. He wants two year community colleges to be free. This is on the tab of the states and the counties. If they opt out, then the plan won't work.

 

He could avoid the situation where the counties are going to opt out, and choose not to receive federal money when it would mean spending more local and state money, and having to follow all sorts of rules on curriculum and quotas and such. He can avoid this, by not suggesting the program. Perhaps lower federal taxes so people can pay taxes directly to their states. This would make financial sense, because the closer the power and decision making is, to the point of expenditure, the less likely the money will be lost in the sauce. States will educate their youth according to the wishes of the local government.

[Ten oz]

Making employers provide healthcare is just a shell game. Where are you going to get the money to buy insurance anyway? From your salary. Where does your salary come from? Your employer. They are already paying for your doctors visits, whether you pay the doctor out of pocket, or through the insurance company.

This is one major philosophical concept about trickle down economics that I reject. They idea that wealth starts at the top and works its way down. You ignorantly state that because an employer pays an employee that they ultimately are paying for everything that employee purchases. TAR, where does the employer get the money to pay the employees and do they pay their employees as a form of charity? Walmart is profits billions a year and employs over 2 million people. Could Walmart make money without employees? Do only wealthiest people shop at Walmart? The top (Walmart's profits) is most often an accumilation of wealth collected from the ground floor (Walmart shoppers). Money does not belong to the top and gets trickled down as a act of compassion and responsibility.

[MigL]

I gotta ask, though...

When you guys ( Americans ) were shopping around for a health care system, Why not take a look at the Canadian model ?

Admittedly its not the best in the world as many relatively rich people ( read, a lot of our politicians ) still opt for private health care, and quite a few go to the US for your excellent, but expensive doctors.

But nobody goes without.

We would have gladly sent some advisors to guide you through the implementation.

We are after all, very similar nations.

[tar]

Ten Oz,

 

I am probably more a bigot, than you. I was raised by a very unbigoted father, but have some distrust of blacks, due to things like Ferguson, where black lives matter, but white police officers lives don't. I know the "he had his hands up" thing was probably a lie. Same as I know "he had his hands up" thing was probably a lie concerning Finicum, in Oregon.

 

When things like reparations are discussed, I think it unworkable and unfair. Not because I am republican, not because I am bigoted, not because I listen to a particular argument. I make my own judgement. Not fair to tax me, to pay the great grandchild of a slave. Not workable to decide who gets how much. Not workable to think that such a punitive measure would all of a sudden make everything OK between whites and blacks.

 

The big problems in poor communities are based on economics and drugs. The cycle would not be broken by giving every black person in America 1000 dollars. That would be gone on food and rent in a couple weeks. So what is fair, a million a man? Everybody white, sitting around trying to make the paycheck stretch and the EQUAL guy next door gets a 100,000 dollar check?

 

It is hard to defend myself against charges of racism if they are based on my opposition to an unworkable situation, or my insistence that someone take care of their own children, or to not steal and kill to get high, or to not try to get over on the man.

 

If Detroit was a nice place to live and work, people would live and work there.

 

I lived for years in a mixed neighborhood, where middle class blacks owned homes, same as middle class whites. As more blacks moved in, more whites moved out. White flight. So the neighborhoods, got more and more run down. The apartment buildings got bars on the first floor windows. Vacant buildings were used as crack houses and all the windows broken out. The grass lawns were turned to dirt, the place went down hill. Crime and drug use rose and merchants, tired of getting robbed, moved out. Jobs left. The place went from middle class to low class.

 

All the jobs were there. All the infrastructure was there. The public schools were there. The trains and buses were there. The opportunities were there.

 

In the 68 riots, 1/4 of Newark was burned. Actually burned. Why would you burn your own house? Even if you were renting from the man. My school was about half and half black and white. We were right outside of Newark, on the other side of East Orange, in Orange. There were walk outs, where I just went home on many a day that year. Fellow Americans, burning buildings, for nothing. To prove what? To prove to a businessman that they should move in to the city and create jobs?

 

Flint is used my Moore to prove that America is bigoted. That had they been white, the response would have been quicker. People that say that, are the same people that say Bush did not respond correctly to New Orleans, because they were black. You can't say that Obama did not respond quickly enough because he is a bigot. I saw a thing the other day that VT chemical engineering students had tested the Flint water and found it unsafe despite the dismissals of Federal safety personnel. It is not a black and white issue. If New Orleans was hard to respond to, it was because the populace was looting and shooting at responders. I don't understand how people can just ignore this facet of the situation. And in terms of Flint, I heard the city was under a state issued manager. This would not have been required if the city management was competent on their own, and electing competent government is the responsibility of the population. If this population is majority black, then the responsibility for the governance of the town is rightly placed squarely on the shoulders of the population of the town. The businesses, the workers, the neighborhoods, the police, fire, health department, everything, belongs to and serves the people of the city. If the city is mostly poor blacks, then the city is mostly poor blacks. How is their being poor, my responsibility as in, the Federal government must now replace the plumbing in Flint?

 

Regards, TAR

Ten Oz,

 

Where the money comes from, is the creation of value. Doing something, making an effort to create a good or service that someone else finds valuable.

 

You may reject the theory of trickle down economics, where the theory is that you will create greater tax receipts if you lower taxes. This is arguable both ways.

 

But you can not reject the idea of economics in the first place. Money is a store of value. Pure and simple. It is not a god given right. You have to earn it.

 

An owner might own the means of production, or own the tree where the apple grows, or own the building where the workers sit, but the workers have to do something that creates value.

 

If anybody can create value any time they want, then you have a capitalist system. You set it up, so that there are fair rules of business and trade. Basically barter, but through an agreed upon system. No employer prints money directly. They make something, and sell it, for a profit. They don't make it and give it away. The people that help in this endeavor are the partners or employees, or contractors. If you work for the government, you don't have to create value. You can just spend tax dollars.

 

Here is where I object to Bernie, taxing the wealthy, like it belongs to the citizens of a rich nation. It does, in the sense that when the rich guy builds a port, we get the jobs to build and run the place and the benefits of being able to bring in raw materials for manufacture and such, and we therefore benefit. But it is of no benefit, for us to steal the rich guys funds, take over his factory and port, and stop the production of the wealth he was in the business of producing.

 

Regards, TAR

MigL,

 

I think we listen to Canada, but we like to have the best.

 

Years ago, I argued against socialized medicine with this analogy. It is crucial to a city, to have city water. Cheap and clean. However, I have a well.

 

Providing the absolute best, to the people that can pay for it, is one thing. Providing the absolute best to everybody, is by definition, impossible.

 

Regards,

[Ten oz]

If New Orleans was hard to respond to, it was because the populace was looting and shooting at responders. I don't understand how people can just ignore this facet of the situation.

 

 

 

You don't know how your BS made up already disproven lie is ignored? The reports of people shooting at responders and murdering in the superdome were proven to media driven fantasies long ago. Congress put together a committee and they investigated the while matter. perhaps you should educate yourself on what really happened.

 

 

From the bypartisan congressional report on Katrina:

 

"The information vacuum in the Superdome was

especially dangerous. Cell phones didn’t work,

the arena’s public address system wouldn’t run

on generator power, and the law enforcement on

hand was reduced to talking to the 20,000 evacuees

using bullhorns and a lot of legwork. “A lot of

them had AM radios, and they would listen to news

reports that talked about the dead bodies at the

Superdome, and the murders in the bathrooms of

the Superdome, and the babies being raped at the

Superdome,” Bush [Maj. Ed Bush, public affairs

officer for the Louisiana Air National Guard] says,

“and it would create terrible panic. I would have to

try and convince them that no, it wasn’t happening.”

The reports of rampant lawlessness, especially the

persistent urban legend of shooting at helicopters,

definitely delayed some emergency and law

enforcement responses. Reports abounded, from

places like Andover, Massachusetts, of localities

refusing to send their firefighters because of “people

shooting at helicopters.” The National Guard refused

to approach the Convention Center until September

2, 100 hours after the hurricane, because “we

waited until we had enough force in place to do an

overwhelming force,” Lieutenant General H. Steven

Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau, told

reporters on September 3

https://www.uscg.mil/history/katrina/docs/USHouseOfRepKatrina2006MainR1eport.pdf

[Phi for All]

You don't know how your BS made up already disproven lie is ignored? The reports of people shooting at responders and murdering in the superdome were proven to media driven fantasies long ago.

 

I wouldn't bother anymore. Tar's delusions are deeply set, and he holds these lies close like a security blanket, sucking his thumb in the fetal position. Fear can be your friend in ignorance. Fear encourages you to lie, and keep lying, double down on the lies, because the alternative is knowledge, and fear can't stand that.

 

I've lost track of the number of bullshit references he's brought up in his feeble attempts to refute actual facts. Pretty soon he'll be back around to the Black Welfare Queen, and we can all turn in our Bigot Bingo cards.

[overtone]

I agreed with trickle down economics. That makes me a republican. Not a bigot.

It makes you a dupe. Your contention that being a dupe is what makes you a "republican" is one of most plausible postings you've made.

 

This is what makes you a bigot:

 

I was raised by a very unbigoted father, but have some distrust of blacks, due to things like Ferguson, where black lives matter, but white police officers lives don't.

- -

It is hard to defend myself against charges of racism if they are based on my opposition to an unworkable situation, or my insistence that someone take care of their own children, or to not steal and kill to get high, or to not try to get over on the man.

 

And this is what makes you dupe and bigot both:

 

And in terms of Flint, I heard the city was under a state issued manager. This would not have been required if the city management was competent on their own, and electing competent government is the responsibility of the population. If this population is majority black, then the responsibility for the governance of the town is rightly placed squarely on the shoulders of the population of the town. The businesses, the workers, the neighborhoods, the police, fire, health department, everything, belongs to and serves the people of the city. If the city is mostly poor blacks, then the city is mostly poor blacks. How is their being poor, my responsibility as in, the Federal government must now replace the plumbing in Flint?

- - -

All the jobs were there. All the infrastructure was there. The public schools were there. The trains and buses were there. The opportunities were there.

 

 

 

Meanwhile, none of that has anything to do with my contention that the Republican Party is America's biggest problem right now. You continue to avoid that issue, even when pretending to respond to my posting in this thread.

 

And in avoiding the central issue of my posting while responding to it, you continue to post falsehoods about it, and me - really very silly, odd, inexplicable "errors" that serve no purpose on this thread. Like this:

 

 

Interesting to me, in this argument, that Overtone is basing her hatred on decisions made during the Gulf war and the Iraq invasion or whatever in the past,

The obsession with "hatred" that you can't seem to shake off, the sheer stupidity of complaining that I am basing anything on "decisions made in the past", the almost comical inability to say anything accurate - anything at all - about me or my posting here,

 

is all in the service of irrelevancy. The threat to America now posed by the current Republican Party appears to be something you cannot address, even in refutation. Why is that?

Edited February 9, 2016 by overtone

[rangerx]

From someone on the outside looking in, demonization is America's biggest problem.

 

Ever since "America, love it or leave it" was coined, concession and universality went out the window.

 

Republicans claim that complaining about the government is patriotic, yet when liberals do it they are labelled as unpatriotic. So long as opposing war rises to the level of "why do you hate our troops?" you folks will always be snookered before breaking the rack. For fear of appearing weak, Americans have a propensity to double down on stupidity. Saying something even more stupid does not erase the lesser stupidity. It only makes one appear twice as stupid. How about "make this country great again" as to suggest you are currently not great? Isn't that admitting to the world you're weak? How about "take this country back", as though one party owns governmental rights, but not the other irrespective of elections? That flies in the face of of democracy for selfishness and espouses imperialism.

 

When Obama became president, conservatives decreed to be the party of no. Not because he was black or liberal (though some believe), but because of a minority imposing it's will on the rest of the populous to spite a democratic process. To refute everything and anything as "checks and balances" is divisive, nonsensical bullshit. I don't need a ton of bricks to fall on my head to know your congress is the height of dysfunction.

 

Guilty until proven innocent is not the rule of law, but certainly commonplace. To a large portion of the population, killing each other with your own guns seems an acceptable consequence of one's own paranoia, that women should be incubators for the state, banning religious expressions while imposing others or that torture is acceptable. These are draconian practices which remain pervasive in the so called land of the free.

 

I'm not defending liberals either. In fact they ought to get off the maybes of global warming and get back to the business of curbing pollution locally, regulating resource extraction and championing human rights. Only then, is the bigger issue addressed properly. So long as some humans are oppressed while others are given carte blanche, the environment will continue to suffer on each other's behalf.

 

I'm seeing quite a pileup on contributor tar. While I don't agree with his viewpoints on most things, he's grounded in his beliefs. I'm sure if he were my neighbor, he'd look out for my interests in my absence irrespective of whatever alignment he might perceive of me for the sake of the community and as a humanitarian. The word bigot got kicked around, but I doubt he wakes every morning thinking about which minority he can abuse or which war he can get us into. On health care, he's just plain wrong on every level. He's unable to see past his own borders or alignment, because much to his chagrin, healthcare is actually workable in numerous countries. He's unable to grapple the concept of harm reduction or preventative medicine so long as there's a dollar to be made doing something less effective. MigL makes an excellent point on this issue, but the long arm of corporate indoctrination prevents the issue from even entering the discussion. Likewise, "trickle down" is not the keystone of the economy insomuch as it is a meme spouted by control freaks.

 

When disaster strikes, America is often the first looked upon for help. Why is this? It's because the country on the whole is affluent and benevolent.That is common ground which most everyone stands upon, although it's often derailed or insulted by a minority of those who invoke "a culture of dependency" drivel. Largely, Americans approve of providing international aid and security. Most countries respect the standing of the USA, even many of the uncivilized ones, but it's not the first choice of refuge either when things go bad. It definitely would not be my first choice. Not for lack of opportunity, but for excessive pettiness, partisanship, horrid health care and misguided security issues. Your veterans are treated poorly (or not at all) and it's reprehensible that charity is only solution to proper rehabilitation. Thoughts and prayers mean squat, they are only cop outs. Both side of the house need to fight tooth and nail to even begin to return the sacrifices made on their behalf, but instead are used as political footballs and places to slash spending. At a humanity level, it's pathetic to the nth degree.

 

Americans are not intellectually superior or technologically advanced as other countries as they'd like to believe either. The sun does not rise and set on America exclusively and not god's (not capitalized) gift to the rest of the world. Sure, the country has astute institutions and multitudes of scholars, inventors and innovation, but those tend to be only accessible to the minority of classes, exclusive to elitists and lag internationally overall. Most Americans can't point to Iraq on a map or pronounce it correctly, no less know what's right or wrong for them socially. After gaining independence, the US dismissed a long standing, still used parliamentary system for whatever you call this one. In case you hadn't noticed, the recent election campaign is the laughing stock of the rest of the planet as little more than a dog and pony show. It's embarrassing to say the least, especially witnessing how gullible people are to it. Definitely not anything others would aspire toward (even though they do dumb shit other ways). I don't see anyone rushing out to change their constitutions according to the American model. Historically, America deserves credit for one thing though. Once they (as allies to others) defeat a country, they'll give it back on a promise to rebuild if they behave accordingly. Japan and Germany are good examples how countries fall into line then move on to succeed, but Iraq failed that test (virtually no allies) because it started a civil war. By claiming national security for attacking Saddam, they ultimately undermined it instead. That is a fact, after the fact. which has has absolutely nothing to do with pacifism as the necons would have you believe. Live by sword, die by the sword. Period.

 

The idea of "American Exceptionalism" is also a joke to anyone outside the US. Americans are every bit as guilty (if not more) as many other countries for imposing their own flawed versions of moral purity, double standards and preemptive dismissal of others.

 

I mirror Ten Oz's opinions for the most part, but not to the degree of dismissing tar's anecdotes as irrelevant. While most of you are entrenched in your opinions, tar is not intransigent in his viewpoints, but in fact conceded on some points. To that end this discussion has made some progress, so it's best to not belittle it. Likewise, he owns up to having a blind eye in some cases. Can the rest of you? I know I'm guilty of it, albeit to a different degree or issue.

 

In America, liberal and conservative have become the sunni and shiite of the western world and the constitution or bible is wielded like the quran is to the jihadist. "Y'all" need to get over yourselves in this manner, or it will ultimately lead to your own undoing.

[tar]

Overtone,

 

I am not interested in your characterizations of reality.

 

I am against the KKK and Sarah Palin and bigotry. It does not matter to you that I say this. You demand that I protect things I don't believe in, and I won't even try and defend things I am against myself.

 

At the superbowl Beonce did a black power thing. I did not even get it. I thought it was just an inappropriate day time display of women in nightclub garb. I just saw it was a black power thing and they were dressed with Berets, as black panthers. Is it OK for me to dislike this kind of in your face stuff, as much as I dislike racist remarks and KKK bravado.

 

I have not ignored any facts. I look at things differently than you do. Check your own fact denials.

 

I am finished here. I am getting neg reps, and I hate neg reps. I am tired of the ad hominem attacks when you guys run out of arguments.

 

Hate the KKK, we don't need them.

 

But don't hate Republicans, we need them.

 

You know exactly how I feel. You know it is not how you feel. I am sad, that I can not converse with you guys, and point out where your arguments are weak and faulty.

 

But you are certain that I am wrong. And that makes you feel good, for some reason, so I will concede you the thread.

 

The republican party is the biggest problem we have in America.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited February 9, 2016 by tar

[iNow]

I know the "he had his hands up" thing was probably a lie. Same as I know "he had his hands up" thing was probably a lie concerning Finicum, in Oregon.

Wake up.

 

http://youtu.be/Q6-jFQPu-yo

http://youtu.be/Ow27I3yTFKc

 

http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/unarmed/

 

• Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people in 2015, more than any other race.
• Nearly 1 in 3 black people killed by police in 2015 were identified as unarmed, though the actual number is likely higher due to underreporting
• 37% of unarmed people killed by police were black in 2015 despite black people being only 13% of the U.S. population
• Unarmed black people were killed at 5x the rate of unarmed whites in 2015

</p>

You may reject the theory of trickle down economics, where the theory is that you will create greater tax receipts if you lower taxes.

Wake up.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/15/news/economy/trickle-down-theory-wrong-imf/

Wealth does not trickle down from the rich to the poor. Period.

 

That's not Senator Elizabeth Warren talking. That's the latest conclusion of new research from the International Monetary Fund.

 

In fact, researchers found that when the top earners in society make more money, it actually slows down economic growth. On the other hand, when poorer people earn more, society as a whole benefits.

 

The researchers calculated that when the richest 20% of society increase their income by one percentage point, the annual rate of growth shrinks by nearly 0.1% within five years.

 

This shows that "the benefits do not trickle down," the researchers wrote in their report, which analyzed over 150 countries.

 

By contrast, when the lowest 20% of earners see their income grow by one percentage point, the rate of growth increases by nearly 0.4% over the same period.

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=42986.0

 

 

I think we listen to Canada, but we like to have the best.Years ago, I argued against socialized medicine with this analogy. It is crucial to a city, to have city water. Cheap and clean. However, I have a well. Providing the absolute best, to the people that can pay for it, is one thing. Providing the absolute best to everybody, is by definition, impossible.

Wake up.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthcare-ranked-dead-last-compared-to-10-other-countries/#14d88d1f1b96

Its fairly well accepted that the U.S. is the most expensive healthcare system in the world, but many continue to falsely assume that we pay more for healthcare because we get better health (or better health outcomes). The evidence, however, clearly doesnt support that view.

[mp][/mp]

I can not converse with you guys, and point out where your arguments are weak and faulty.

Think for just a moment about why that is. Take your time.

[StringJunky]

 

I wouldn't bother anymore. Tar's delusions are deeply set, and he holds these lies close like a security blanket, sucking his thumb in the fetal position. Fear can be your friend in ignorance. Fear encourages you to lie, and keep lying, double down on the lies, because the alternative is knowledge, and fear can't stand that.

He's displaying a form arrogant ignorance which I think seems to be a popular approach amongst. many Republicans and probably others with different politics.. If one is a devout, true-believer (in anything), how can one be any more than that?

[overtone]

He's displaying a form arrogant ignorance which I think seems to be a popular approach amongst. many Republicans and probably others with different politics.. If one is a devout, true-believer (in anything), how can one be any more than that?

 

There's another and more sympathetic factor: denial of guilt. Politics is a central responsibility of adults in a democracy. These guys have an entire adult life of having been wrong, badly and inexcusably and fundamentally wrong, about the central and most significant sociopolitical issues of their time. In being wrong they betrayed their country, their neighbors, their families, and their proclaimed principles. And then it all blew up in their faces.

 

Even worse, a large number of people they have despised and treated with contempt have been revealed to have been right - all along, repeatedly, consistently, for years.

 

So now what?

 

Like the Confederate veterans after the Civil War, they are surrounded by wreckage and judgment. Denial, revision, diminution of event, this is my story and I'm stickin' to it, kill the messenger, are all human responses. One can sympathize.

Edited February 9, 2016 by overtone

[MigL]

So, as Rangerx pointed out, are we going to discuss the actual issues, or just continue to beat up on Tar ?

[iNow]

I can point to Iraq on a map. On what else specifically would you like me to comment?