Liberal free for all coming to an end

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Democrats--Lets make everybody happy, regardless the cost.

Republicans--fuck the poor, lets make the rich happy, regardless the cost.

So very wrong about the Democrats.

More accurate: let's serve our rich masters in a different way that recognizes that if you openly campaign for fucking the poor, they may vote for you sometimes (because Americans are notorious for voting against their interests), but they may also decide to fuck you (which is why we have Social Security, unemployment insurance, and other New Deal legislation rather than a Depression-era revolution). I've always thought Republicans were way more honest about whose interests they serve than are Democrats. In both cases, though, it's not my interests.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by smc

So very wrong about the Democrats.

More accurate: let's serve our rich masters in a different way that recognizes that if you openly campaign for fucking the poor, they may vote for you sometimes (because Americans are notorious for voting against their interests), but they may also decide to fuck you (which is why we have Social Security, unemployment insurance, and other New Deal legislation rather than a Depression-era revolution). I've always thought Republicans were way more honest about whose interests they serve than are Democrats. In both cases, though, it's not my interests.

Looks like the cost is starting to make everybody unhappy.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by scott441

You know what i find amazing in this debate on healthcare is, the health industry always says "We don't make any money on this", hospitals are the same, no one makes any money, we just get by. Doctors too say the same. You know for an industry that makes no money, they sure are fighting hard to stop this.

Because doctors don't want a load of bureaucratic BS to get between them and their patients.

Originally Posted by scott441

Lets look at healthcare in a new way. They make sure they empty your bank account if your sick, and have to go to the hospital. They are making billions on your, mothers cancer, or your grannies bad joints.

This is obviously full of emotion and devoid of any objectivity. To which no response will be heard.

Originally Posted by scott441

I notice you say its the will of the American people, your math is like most of your quote, full of Russ,

According to the polls, about 10% of Americans want to health care bill to stay as it is, and 56% want it repealed. Put that in your calculator.

[ila]

I would think that a lot of the resistance to any US universal healthcare is fear of the unknown. I've read and heard the debate in many different media and there seems to be a lot of fearmongering on both the pro and con sides.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

In the words of Tavis Smiley: "I believe budgets are moral documents."

The US now finds itself riddled with money problems and what is the solution the Tea Party and others like yourself prefer? To balance the budget "on the backs of the poor" as Smiley said.

I have said to you and others on this forum before, I admit capitalism isn't for everyone. But here in America, that's what we have. You never told me which country you would rather live in. So let's start with France.

Originally Posted by Tom Dibblee

How to Move to Paris with No Money
Paris is possible. You do not need a French relative or a dowry of millions. You only need ingenuity and thirst. If you?ve got those, this storied city, the matron saint of expatriation, will be yours.

This guide is for Americans with insufficient funds and little tolerance for endless preparation (or any preparation), for those who rely on that special brand of luck crossed with tenacity and patience. Here?s how to begin: Save no money. Make no plans. Just get on the plane.

Once you get there, as an American passport-holder you?ll have 90 days before your tourist visa expires, so you?d better hit the ground running.

Read the rest here: http://matadornetwork.com/notebook/destination-guides/how-to-move-to-paris-with-no-money
Bon voyage.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I wonder Tracy: you were against the stimulus but are you for corporate welfare? It would be quite the case of hypocrisy if you were for corporate welfare--which includes the military industrial complex--since the stimulus and welfare are ultimately the same thing.

When did I ever say I was for corporate welfare? I think bailing out car companies and financial institutions is ok, as long as it's in the form of a loan, and they don't try and take over the company's operations. As for funding the military industry, it's not welfare if it's paying for goods and services.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by ila

I would think that a lot of the resistance to any US universal healthcare is fear of the unknown. I've read and heard the debate in many different media and there seems to be a lot of fearmongering on both the pro and con sides.

It goes against the Constitution. The government can regulate actions such as driving or commerce etc, but the government cannot regulate inaction, such as deciding not to buy health care.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Democrats--Lets make everybody happy, regardless the cost.

Republicans--fuck the poor, lets make the rich happy, regardless the cost.

You can't make everybody happy, so that's going to be pretty damn expensive. And the republican's philosophy is more like teach a person to fish rather than giving them a handout.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

According to the polls, about 10% of Americans want to health care bill to stay as it is, and 56% want it repealed. Put that in your calculator.

Once again, Tracy proves that Tracy will twist anything in an attempt to prove a point. This undoubtedly comes from the latest Rasmussen poll, released today (February 21, 2010).

Here's what it says on the Rasmussen Reports own page:

"The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 56% favor repeal of the health care law, including 43% who Strongly Favor repeal. Forty percent (40%) oppose repeal of the law, including 27% who are Strongly Opposed."

Regarding Rasmussen, other pollsters who have never been accused by anyone of having a bias often speak of Rasmussen as being biased. Many news organizations -- also, not Fox or MSNBC, but ones that are not typically accused of having a bias -- will not cite Rasmussen polls because the surveys it conducts are automated (known as IVRs for "interactive voice response") rather than the kind of live telephone interview polls that are used by organizations like Gallup, Pew Research, Quinnipiac University, and the major newspapers and television networks.

During 2010 election polling, some Rasmussen polls were revealed to have asked only self-identified Republican voters about congressional races. Do you think the Republican would come out on top in such polls?

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

When did I ever say I was for corporate welfare? I think bailing out car companies and financial institutions is ok, as long as it's in the form of a loan, and they don't try and take over the company's operations. As for funding the military industry, it's not welfare if it's paying for goods and services.

TLB Forum Members, you must read very carefully to uncover the Tracy Coxx method of deflecting a point that Tracy can't really answer. I started the questioning about corporate welfare, specifically putting it in the Tracy context: Tracy writing baseless things about indolent people who are presumably on welfare and a major cause of the condition of the U.S. government's finances. I posed a question: will Tracy state unequivocally that all corporate welfare must end? All the subsidies, special tax loopholes, etc., all of which exist because the corporations buy these laws via the politicans they own -- of BOTH parties.

Tracy doesn't answer. As his Tracy's wont, Tracy answers questions with questions: "When did I ever say __________?" (fill in the blank).

This method is meant to dissemble, not enlighten. It is meant to avoid, not discuss. It is meant to hide, not defend one's views.

Review all of Tracy's posts, and you will find this method running like a thread through them.

[Enoch Root]

Tracy,

You wrote: “I have said to you and others on this forum before, I admit capitalism isn't for everyone. But here in America, that's what we have. You never told me which country you would rather live in. So let's start with France.” To deal with stupid issues first: you are diverting attention from the issue at hand by brushing me off because I don’t live in a fair country. Stating that accomplishes nothing, Tracy. But I’ll answer anyway and the answer is in two parts. 1) I would prefer to live in my homeland of Puerto Rico, but I would like this country to belong to its people. For it to belong to me and my compatriots it is necessary that the American Empire leave us alone. Further, it is necessary for private industry to stop exploiting my brothers. My country is a colony of the American Empire. How ironic! The 13 colonies that rebelled against empire and became a nation is now an empire itself! 2) I shouldn’t have to move somewhere else—and neither should anybody else have to move—because no country has the right to exploit its people.

To expand further on the quote provided: the attitude expressed by the quote is easily summarized as “fuck the poor.” “It’s not for everyone. It’s poor people’s fault they are poor. They like being poor. What other explanation is there for it?” Do you think people should just accept their exploitation? Capitalism isn’t for everyone but it still depends on a pool of easily exploited people. Capitalism is only for the ruling class. Everyone else is treated like an object, like a tool, like an inferior. You are telling people to be quiet because, after all, “in America, [capitalism is] what we have.” You shrug your shoulders and you shrug off any responsibility for the well-being of your compatriots.

Further, your directing me to France is part of the childish and ridiculous disdain people like you have for social democracies. Sending me off to France in no way addresses the inequalities of my homeland and the inequalities of the US.

And Tracy, stop it with these ridiculous tricks. I never said you were for corporate welfare. I asked you if you were for corporate welfare. I wanted an answer from you.

The military industrial complex is a beast fed by corporate welfare. It is a perpetual war machine. Why should companies receive money but not people in need? Does it all really come down to “people don’t make goods and services”? “Never mind them because they don’t make me rich”? Which is all to say: is it an attitude that dehumanizes people and objectifies them as cogs in the corporate machine and when said cogs can’t work anymore we throw them out?

Smc, Enoch, Randolph and others… You really aren’t going to be able to “win” this one. I have been monitoring this thread (and similar ones) for quite a while now. Tracy has the game down pat and no matter how well thought out, logical or well presented your arguments are you will never get her to admit you are right. Any more than Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh would.

This “discussion” is not political discourse--there is no debate of “ideas.” And no attempt at resolution or understanding. There is only name calling, “I didn’t say that,” and recitation of right wing partisan “talking points” and dubious facts that any 12 year old could learn from listening to Rush Limbaugh. False choices are often presented as well: “where would you rather live than the US?” is not really a valid question. It completely omits the fact that the person objecting to capitalist greed, lack of universal health care, racism, homophobia, etc. may want to STAY in the US--indeed they have a RIGHT to live in the US as a citizen--only to want to make things better.

I was raised in a conservative Republican home and read Ayn Rand at a very early age. My degrees include an MBA and a minor in Economics so please, spare me your attempts at “educating” me. As I have gotten older and seen the failures of our socioeconomic system I have developed a much more inclusive view of the world that includes a greater role of government. At the same time I am a champion of individual rights and freedom. As you might expect, I have very complex views on many subjects and enjoy a friendly discussion of genuine “ideas” with people I know and respect.

Unfortunately, these threads are not the place for that. I for one am tired of logging on to TLB only to see “Ronald Reagan,” or “Liberal Free for All…” or whatever at the top of the page when it should say something like “Kelly Shore and Rakel Rodriguez Together” or “Support for Victims of Violence” or even “RU Gay 4 Liking Shemales.” Who knows, I could be totally wrong about all of this. I for the most part, have totally ignored these postings before and will continue to do so once again.

[smc]

Originally Posted by aw9725

Smc, Enoch, Randolph and others? You really aren?t going to be able to ?win? this one. I have been monitoring this thread (and similar ones) for quite a while now. Tracy has the game down pat and no matter how well thought out, logical or well presented your arguments are you will never get her to admit you are right. Any more than Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh would.

This ?discussion? is not political discourse--there is no debate of ?ideas.? And no attempt at resolution or understanding. There is only name calling, ?I didn?t say that,? and recitation of right wing partisan ?talking points? and dubious facts that any 12 year old could learn from listening to Rush Limbaugh. False choices are often presented as well: ?where would you rather live than the US?? is not really a valid question. It completely omits the fact that the person objecting to capitalist greed, lack of universal health care, racism, homophobia, etc. may want to STAY in the US--indeed they have a RIGHT to live in the US as a citizen--only to want to make things better.

I was raised in a conservative Republican home and read Ayn Rand at a very early age. My degrees include an MBA and a minor in Economics so please, spare me your attempts at ?educating? me. As I have gotten older and seen the failures of our socioeconomic system I have developed a much more inclusive view of the world that includes a greater role of government. At the same time I am a champion of individual rights and freedom. As you might expect, I have very complex views on many subjects and enjoy a friendly discussion of genuine ?ideas? with people I know and respect.

Unfortunately, these threads are not the place for that. I for one am tired of logging on to TLB only to see ?Ronald Reagan,? or ?Liberal Free for All?? or whatever at the top of the page when it should say something like ?Kelly Shore and Rakel Rodriguez Together? or ?Support for Victims of Violence? or even ?RU Gay 4 Liking Shemales.? Who knows, I could be totally wrong about all of this. I for the most part, have totally ignored these postings before and will continue to do so once again.

You are absolutely correct. The ONLY value of "engaging" Tracy (and I realize that using the word "engaging" is an insult to the real engagement that goes on in genuine discourse) is the value that accrues to those who read but do not post, and who may -- even if only a bit -- figure out that drivel such as that spewed in these threads again and again warrants at least a critical eye, not the fealty to ignorance that tends to accompany the statement of such drivel.

[randolph]

OK all you passionate political posters, let's see who can identify the author of the following passage.

The word ?We? is as lime poured over men, which sets and hardens to stone, and crushes all beneath it, and that which is white and that which is black are lost equally in the grey of it. It is the word by which the depraved steal the virtue of the good, by which the weak steal the might of the strong, by which the fools steal the wisdom of the sages.
What is my joy if all hands, even the unclean, can reach into it? What is my wisdom, if even the fools can dictate to me? What is my freedom, if all creatures, even the botched and impotent, are my masters? What is my life, if I am but to bow, to agree and to obey?
But I am done with this creed of corruption.
I am done with the monster ?We?, the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame.
And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god will grant them joy and peace and pride.
This god is one word: ?I?

[ila]

Originally Posted by randolph

OK all you passionate political posters, let's see who can identify the author of the following passage.

It's from Ayn Rand.

Big deal.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by smc

You are absolutely correct. The ONLY value of "engaging" Tracy (and I realize that using the word "engaging" is an insult to the real engagement that goes on in genuine discourse) is the value that accrues to those who read but do not post, and who may -- even if only a bit -- figure out that drivel such as that spewed in these threads again and again warrants at least a critical eye, not the fealty to ignorance that tends to accompany the statement of such drivel.

Agreed.

aw9725: you are completely correct. There is no real substantive discussion going on here. There is no exciting exchange of ideas. But this is because Tracy brings no substance whatever to this thread or other threads, no substance whatever to the forum as a whole. You, smc, randolph and myself try our best to bring real ideas. Tracy only brings half-baked tirades about...everything. And when two--or however many people are involved in a discussion--people in a discussion do not both bring real ideas the discussion breaks down.

But while this is by no means a real discussion as may be had by, say, biological evolutionists about the placement of a fossil in the evolutionary tree, it is precisely due to the vapid nature of Tracy's post that some of us counter her. I, for one, do not do this for her sake. I do it for the sake of the readers and members of this forum. To paraphrase Bill Maher: in America bullshit spreads real fast and you have to get in there quick to get rid of it before it reaches critical mass.

smc: Fealty to ignorance. Love that phrase. I'm stealing it for my short stories...

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by randolph

OK all you passionate political posters, let's see who can identify the author of the following passage.

A selfish bitch who is more interested in self-glorification than empowering and educating people?

...That's what Ayn Rand means in Ta?no, right?...

[randolph]

Originally Posted by ila

It's from Ayn Rand.

Big deal.

What I was going to point out is that Ayn Rand is worshiped by conservatives. Her concept of the ego centered individual indulging in a "free market" is the center piece of Reagan and subsequent Republican Presidents. It was further fostered by Milton Friedman and Alan Greenspan.
The US was founded on "We the people". The founders understood the principle of cooperation for mutual benefit, WE will do it. The turmoil building in this country is the direct result of conservatives diminishing the public for personal benefit.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

OK all you passionate political posters, let's see who can identify the author of the following passage.

Ayn Rand-The biggest philosophy poser of all time.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

To deal with stupid issues first: you are diverting attention from the issue at hand by brushing me off because I don?t live in a fair country. Stating that accomplishes nothing, Tracy. But I?ll answer anyway and the answer is in two parts. 1) I would prefer to live in my homeland of Puerto Rico, but I would like this country to belong to its people. For it to belong to me and my compatriots it is necessary that the American Empire leave us alone.

I agree with you on that, and I do find it hypocritical that the US treats your country the way it was treated over 200 years ago by England. I do not have any firsthand knowledge about what things are like there, but I do know that Puerto Ricans are able to leave their country, but you want to stay in the hope that Puerto Rico will one day belong to it's people. Fine. More power to the people of Puerto Rico. Seriously. But who knows when or if this will ever happen. Knowing this, things are at least good enough for you to want to stay none the less.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

To expand further on the quote provided: the attitude expressed by the quote is easily summarized as ?fuck the poor.? ?It?s not for everyone. It?s poor people?s fault they are poor. They like being poor. What other explanation is there for it?? Do you think people should just accept their exploitation?

As I said in the Reagan thread, I think your views of life in America are tainted by your experiences in Puerto Rico. If not, are you saying things here are like they are there? The other explanation you asked for is there are obviously people in America who are all for socialism. I am not denying that, and my quote is my recognition that I'm not going to change their minds. There are several other countries they can go to where they will be as happy as frogs in a swamp. But here they are a square peg in a round hole. This is a capitalist country, and hopefully it will remain a capitalist country despite BO's promise to fundamentally change America. It not my recommendation that the poor find another country. It is my recommendation that people in a capitalist country who can't stand capitalism find another country. My link to the article about how to do that when you have no money was in response to an earlier comment you made that it is often cost prohibitive.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Capitalism isn?t for everyone but it still depends on a pool of easily exploited people. Capitalism is only for the ruling class. Everyone else is treated like an object, like a tool, like an inferior.

Let's stop speaking in generalities. Who in America is being exploited so we can at least talk about specific cases.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You are telling people to be quiet because, after all, ?in America, [capitalism is] what we have.? You shrug your shoulders and you shrug off any responsibility for the well-being of your compatriots.

Well it is in fact a capitalist country. If other countries want socialism fine. Let them have at it. But there is a place on Earth were we're capitalists - for all those who want to live in a capitalist country, there is a choice - the USA. There is no iron curtain. We don't keep people here against their will to live as capitalists.

Let's say there's a nudist colony of people living there and doing their thing. Then someone is raised in the colony, grows up and decides being a nudist isn't for her. She becomes a nun and has all her preconceptions about the evil nudists, spouting off how things should be in her eyes and how she feels like a 2nd class citizen in nudist land. Should the nudist colony change to accommodate the nun? No. She should admit that being a nudist isn't her thing and hey, there's a whole world of fully clothed bible thumpers out there. Why not go there?

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And Tracy, stop it with these ridiculous tricks. I never said you were for corporate welfare. I asked you if you were for corporate welfare.

No.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The military industrial complex is a beast fed by corporate welfare. It is a perpetual war machine. Why should companies receive money but not people in need?

Stop with these ridiculous tricks. I never said that people in need should not receive any aid. In fact, I said:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

but 60% for welfare programs for a country with as many opportunities as US has is quite excessive. I am certainly not saying welfare should be cut entirely, but a number that high is screaming for scrutiny to see where cuts can be made.

There are other avenues for people in need to get help. It doesn't always have to come from the government. In 2006, Americans have donated $295 billion to charities. The amount donated has been rising about 150% faster than the economy for more than 50 years. Americans have been much more generous than other countries to charities. Again, companies receive money for goods and services. If they received money as a charity, and not as a loan, then that would be welfare. Do you see the difference?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Does it all really come down to ?people don?t make goods and services??

lol no. Of course people make goods and services, and when they do they receive a salary. And as for the predictable response of why their salaries are so much lower than the CEOs? I explained it in the Reagan thread.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by ila

It's from Ayn Rand.

I like Ayn Rand. A rare atheist conservative like me.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I like Ayn Rand. A rare atheist conservative like me.

Tracy and I agree on something! The two books I read were Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Both when I was in my teens.

[Tread]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

There are other avenues for people in need to get help. It doesn't always have to come from the government. In 2006, Americans have donated $295 billion to charities. The amount donated has been rising about 150% faster than the economy for more than 50 years. Americans have been much more generous than other countries to charities.

Like what other countries? Bangladesh, Burma, Burundi, Haiti, Liberia, Nicaragua or others who have real issues to survive? With that you try to put the USA in a perspective that is not true.
I said it before http://forum.transladyboy.com/showth...065#post164103
Only the total amount of money can look good. And this is only because you have a high population with a high GDP/GDI. With these facts you always look not so good, as country or per citizen.
But you have statistics where you are at top and mostly #1, like military expenses (total nearly 50% of the world military expenses and second per GDP), most prisoners (total and incarceration), crime rates that can compared to the worst countries in the world, the highest health costs of all, and not to talk about your eco-balance.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by aw9725

Tracy and I agree on something! The two books I read were Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Both when I was in my teens.

I read her book "Anthem" written in 1937. Her writing reflected the times. Many people thought communism was the wave of the future, she strongly disagreed. She grew up in Russia during the revolution and the takeover by the Bolsheviks. She saw the brutality, the oppression and the lack of freedom of a collectivist society. It strongly colored her future writing.
In my opinion, her writing is somewhat adolescent and rather naive. She doesn't understand the essence of humanity which is cooperative effort. She is basically sociopathic in her out look. I guess that's why she is popular with conservatives.

I am well aware of how Rand is received by liberals in academia. Whatever your interpretation of Rand, at least as a teenager, I was intrigued and influenced by the potential of the “individual” to make a difference in society. I have always been strongly independent and reading about characters such as John Galt or Hank Rearden appealed to me. As did the strong women in their lives. This strength of character is neither “right” nor “left” politically. My own beliefs about Rand may have indeed changed over the years. After all, in another thread on here, someone else calls me a “liberal professor”!

Anyway, I’m not sure that “Atlas Shrugged” would have the same impact on me today as it did when I was 17. Randolph makes some good points about what is "wrong" with much of her writing and philosophy. You are free to ridicule Rand all you want in this thread. However I would ask that you not attack me personally--unless you would like to meet in “real life” to discuss it.

After March 5 I have decided that I will no longer be participating on TLB. I have enjoyed getting to know some of you and hope that you will continue to keep in touch via email.

Andy

[randolph]

Andy

You are free to ridicule Rand all you want in this thread. However I would ask that you not attack me personally--unless you would like to meet in ?real life? to discuss it.

I am not aware of personally attacking you at any time in any post. Perhaps I am misinterpreting the above quote. I sincerely hope you change your mind, your posts are well thought out and add to the forum.

[TracyCoxx]

Just like the democrats in congress, the Wisconsin democrats have to use dirty underhanded, even illegal methods to get their agenda passed. Albeit they've gone much further than the ones in congress and actually have warrants out for their arrest!

It amazes me how many times democratic organizations and politicians try to skirt procedures and laws to push their agenda. Ranging from back room, midnight sessions to pass major legislation to staging a walkout to stop a vote. There was also a walkout in Texas' congress several years ago, guess which side... the democrats. And then there's groups like ACORN whose modus operandi includes election fraud and aid for whore houses, or the ACLU protecting the rights of organizations like NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). Democratic congressmen openly try and set the stage to allow illegal aliens to vote. The democratic unions and politicians in Wisconsin want to push their agenda to the point of putting their state in debt and forcing layoffs. Just do your job, represent your people and show up and vote.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Just like the democrats in congress, the Wisconsin democrats have to use dirty underhanded, even illegal methods to get their agenda passed. Albeit they've gone much further than the ones in congress and actually have warrants out for their arrest!

It amazes me how many times democratic organizations and politicians try to skirt procedures and laws to push their agenda. Ranging from back room, midnight sessions to pass major legislation to staging a walkout to stop a vote. There was also a walkout in Texas' congress several years ago, guess which side... the democrats. And then there's groups like ACORN whose modus operandi includes election fraud and aid for whore houses, or the ACLU protecting the rights of organizations like NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). Democratic congressmen openly try and set the stage to allow illegal aliens to vote. The democratic unions and politicians in Wisconsin want to push their agenda to the point of putting their state in debt and forcing layoffs. Just do your job, represent your people and show up and vote.

Surly Tracy you can come up with more bad things Democrats are fond of doing and yes the ACLU is another awful organization. Unions of course harbor criminals and other bad types. And LIBERALS, gasp, oh horrors! How can upright honest decent conservative Republicans stand to live in the same country with all this riff raff. It's truly disgusting. Oh, by the way, Tracy did you know that there are actually poor conservatives that have criminal records and quite a few are in JAIL. OMG how can that happen? Surely it is the result of a liberal conspiracy to secretly do away with conservatives. Something has to be done to protect conservatives from this relentless thrust by evil LIBERALS to take over the country.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Just like the democrats in congress, the Wisconsin democrats have to use dirty underhanded, even illegal methods to get their agenda passed. Albeit they've gone much further than the ones in congress and actually have warrants out for their arrest!

It amazes me how many times democratic organizations and politicians try to skirt procedures and laws to push their agenda. Ranging from back room, midnight sessions to pass major legislation to staging a walkout to stop a vote. There was also a walkout in Texas' congress several years ago, guess which side... the democrats. And then there's groups like ACORN whose modus operandi includes election fraud and aid for whore houses, or the ACLU protecting the rights of organizations like NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). Democratic congressmen openly try and set the stage to allow illegal aliens to vote. The democratic unions and politicians in Wisconsin want to push their agenda to the point of putting their state in debt and forcing layoffs. Just do your job, represent your people and show up and vote.

Tracy Coxx is a master of telling you only parts of a story, or simply repeating drivel that has been refuted by reputable investigations and news organization (that is, pretty much anyone other than Fox "News" and WorldNetDaily.

The statements about ACORN are right-wing drivel. Whatever one thinks of ACORN, concerted election fraud and aid for whorehouses is nothing but far-right talking points, baseless drivel. Tracy loves to repeat such crap, knowing how easy it is to hide behind the anonymity of the Internet and get away with spewing bullshit.

Tracy wants you to think that only Democrats employ the walkout strategy, because if Tracy told the truth Tracy would have to reveal that this is a tactic used by both sides. History, though, gets in the way when you insist -- as does Tracy -- on having your own "facts" (that is, not real facts, but the things you want people to believe). But facts are a tenacious thing; they tend to stick around:

• California Assembly, 1994: When the Assembly was evenly split, 40-40, between Democrats and Republicans, the Republican members refused to show up for floor sessions in an effort to prevent Democrats from electing Willie Brown as speaker with less than a majority vote. The Republicans stayed out for several days but finally relented in January 1995.
  
• Nevada Senate, 1999: In a complicated conflict over privatization of workers' compensation, the entire Republican majority left the chamber in the middle of a night session in anger over a speech by a Democrat. The minority Democrats who remained in the chamber issued a call of the house. The sergeant-at-arms was able to round up enough Republicans to make a quorum, and the Democrats proceeded to pass two bills. Later that day, the Republicans returned and, after a motion to reconsider by two of the Republicans who had been compelled to attend, overturned the Senate's actions on those bills.

Regardless of what one thinks about these tactics, or about either of the parties, the truth ought to be told. There are, by the way, examples going all the way back to Lincoln and the Illinois legislature.

Tracy doesn't mention how yesterday, in the Ohio legislature, a bill seeking to take away collective-bargaining rights from public employees was pushed through by the Republican majority in an underhanded manner. Some Republicans didn't want to go along with their leadership, so they were removed from committees on which they had votes and where they might have opened a debate and stopped the bill from proceeding so quickly and replaced by any other Republican who would vote the way the leadership wanted. This happened in two committees and the votes then took place in the course of an hour. This enabled the legislation to get to the floor, where it passed by one vote. Several historians of parliamentary procedure have already noted that this is the most underhanded maneuver they've seen in a state legislature in decades. These Republicans who disagee with their leadership were denied the right to read the legislation and debate it. As one Republican Ohio legislator noted, his party did the same thing the national Republicans accused the Democrats of doing with the healthcare bill in Congress!

If you want to understand Tracy's behavior, look up "GIFT" -- the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. I apologize in advance for the use of "fuckwad" by those who first articulated this theory, but it does explain what we see again and again in this and the other drivel-filled threads Tracy starts on this site.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by smc

Tracy Coxx is a master of telling you only part of a story. Tracy doesn't mention how yesterday, in the Ohio legislature, a bill seeking to take away collective-bargaining rights from public employees was pushed through by the Republican majority in an underhanded manner. Some Republicans didn't want to go along with their leadership, so they were removed from committees on which they had votes and where they might have opened a debate and stopped the bill from proceeding so quickly and replaced by any other Republican who would vote the way the leadership wanted. This happened in two committees and the votes then took place in the course of an hour. This enabled the legislation to get to the floor, where it passed by one vote. Several historians of parliamentary procedure have already noted that this is the most underhanded maneuver they've seen in a state legislature in decades. These Republicans who disagee with their leadership were denied the right to read the legislation and debate it. As one Republican Ohio legislator noted, his party did the same thing the national Republicans accused the Democrats of doing with the healthcare bill in Congress!

The conservatives are determined, by hook or crook, to seversly weaken the middle class. Their financial masters (Koch bothers) pour money into elections to get their lackeys elected. Unionized workers are among the few that have seen their wages stay ahead of inflation. Most workers have not seen gains in wages (adjusted for inflation) for many years.
Granted, there is a severe problem with excessively generous retirement benefits. Our local county is spiraling deeper and deeper into debt as a result of retirement benefits granted to firemen and police officers. Who is at fault in this? It seem to me, its the fault of the dumbass officials that failed to look into the future costs of the plans they approved.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Granted, there is a severe problem with excessively generous retirement benefits. Our local county is spiraling deeper and deeper into debt as a result of retirement benefits granted to firemen and police officers. Who is at fault in this? It seem to me, its the fault of the dumbass officials that failed to look into the future costs of the plans they approved.

I'm saddened to see you fall into this trap of "blaming" -- whether implicitly or explicitly -- working people for the current situation. Police, firemen, teachers, and other public workers are simply demanding what is theirs already. A pension is not a gift; it is part of the wage/benefit package that was negotiated contractually. And it is the very, very, very rare pension plan indeed that does not include a significant contribution from the worker herself or himself. So, all these public employees are demanding is to be paid the money that is THEIRS!

Why are counties, cities, and states so strapped? Not because the amount os the pensions are out of line. It is because the money was LOST. And who lost it? The very Wall Street bankers who, enabled by the politicians they own, used this money in their casino -- a casino that nearly brought down this country economically. They ran, and continue to run, a massive financial fraud and not a single one is under indictment or behind bars.

Put the blame where it belongs. Once we do that, we can begin the process of recovering the money stolen from working people by these criminals.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by smc

I'm saddened to see you fall into this trap of "blaming" -- whether implicitly or explicitly -- working people for the current situation. Police, firemen, teachers, and other public workers are simply demanding what is theirs already. A pension is not a gift; it is part of the wage/benefit package that was negotiated contractually. And it is the very, very, very rare pension plan indeed that does not include a significant contribution from the worker herself or himself. So, all these public employees are demanding is to be paid the money that is THEIRS!



Why are counties, cities, and states so strapped? Not because the amount os the pensions are out of line. It is because the money was LOST. And who lost it? The very Wall Street bankers who, enabled by the politicians they own, used this money in their casino -- a casino that nearly brought down this country economically. They ran, and continue to run, a massive financial fraud and not a single one is under indictment or behind bars.

Put the blame where it belongs. Once we do that, we can begin the process of recovering the money stolen from working people by these criminals.

Certainly, workers earn and deserve a just retirement. However, the evidence suggests that at the time the retirement plan was negotiated, the ultimate costs were not projected. The plans were extremely generous, far beyond what would be considered reasonable.
The question is it justified to give some one a retirement higher than his final salary? Is it justified to play games with work time to raise the retirement even more? In the case of Riverside County, there is no evidence the money was "lost" it seems to be a case of bad fiscal planning and management.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Certainly, workers earn and deserve a just retirement. However, the evidence suggests that at the time the retirement plan was negotiated, the ultimate costs were not projected. The plans were extremely generous, far beyond what would be considered reasonable.
The question is it justified to give some one a retirement higher than his final salary? Is it justified to play games with work time to raise the retirement even more? In the case of Riverside County, there is no evidence the money was "lost" it seems to be a case of bad fiscal planning and management.

I'm even more saddened, now. You should review the meaning of the word you use, "just." Whether the plans were "far beyond ... reasonable" is at best a secondary point, and one that is worthy of consideration for future pension agreements. The primary point is one of ownership, as in ownership of the money that is being withheld. It does not belong to Riverside County; it belongs to the workers. And so, I ask, is it "just" to keep it from them? And if it simply does not exist to give to them, is it "just" to blame them for wanting what is rightfully theirs?

[randolph]

SMC

And so, I ask, is it "just" to keep it from them? And if it simply does not exist to give to them, is it "just" to blame them for wanting what is rightfully theirs?

The employees have a right to whatever was negotiated with the County. I am not blaming the employees for the lack of funds necessary to pay their retirements. Riverside County finances depend to a large extent on development fees and taxes. Development has crashed in this area resulting in severe economic distress for the County. As with other government agencies they spend more they can bring in. I doubt any agency keeps its retirement program fully funded at all times regardless of the current economy. Consequently, the County is faced with a future shortfall in its retirement system.
Is it fair that the taxpayers will ultimately be required to fork up the money to pay for these very generous retirements approved by County administraters? Needless to say Riverside County voters are thoroughly pissed off.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

SMC

The employees have a right to whatever was negotiated with the County. I am not blaming the employees for the lack of funds necessary to pay their retirements. Riverside County finances depend to a large extent on development fees and taxes. Development has crashed in this area resulting in severe economic distress for the County. As with other government agencies they spend more they can bring in. I doubt any agency keeps its retirement program fully funded at all times regardless of the current economy. Consequently, the County is faced with a future shortfall in its retirement system.
Is it fair that the taxpayers will ultimately be required to fork up the money to pay for these very generous retirements approved by County administraters? Needless to say Riverside County voters are thoroughly pissed off.

No, it's not fair that taxpayers -- working people themselves -- should bear the brunt of this. As I wrote earlier, the answer, as far-fetched as it may seem, lies in addressing the criminal behavior of those who are truly responsible for the problem. There is MORE THAN ENOUGH money to pay these pensions, pay for universal healthcare, free college tuition for every American, daycare, job training, ... you name it. The problem is not how much money there is, but who has stolen it and continues to hoard it, and who enables this on the criminals' behalf (Democrats and Republicans alike).

The first step is to acknowledge the truth. I'm still waiting for that from you, Randolph. Based on what you've written many times, I'm finding it difficult to understand why it's taking so long. I recognize that you are probably one of those Riverside County taxpayers. But at the same time that you angrily accept your fate -- to have to pay for these pensions -- is it not possible to acknowledge that in doing so you are being stolen from by the very people who should be giving back the money for those pensions?

[randolph]

SMC

The first step is to acknowledge the truth. I'm still waiting for that from you, Randolph. Based on what you've written many times, I'm finding it difficult to understand why it's taking so long. I recognize that you are probably one of those Riverside County taxpayers. But at the same time that you angrily accept your fate -- to have to pay for these pensions -- is it not possible to acknowledge that in doing so you are being stolen from by the very people who should be giving back the money for those pensions?

In various posts, I have complained bitterly about the rape of the working class by the Wall Street banks and the complicity of our Federal government. Why aren't these criminals in jail? The laws are configured to punish the little guys while hoards of lawyers are able to get the rich off when and if they are charged with crimes. The horrendous loss of 401K savings by working people should be addressed by a heavy tax on the obscene profits accumulated by the rich investors. These funds would then be used to restore at least some of the 401K losses.

[franalexes]

Originally Posted by randolph

SMC

In various posts, I have complained bitterly about the rape of the working class by the Wall Street banks and the complicity of our Federal government. Why aren't these criminals in jail? The laws are configured to punish the little guys while hoards of lawyers are able to get the rich off when and if they are charged with crimes. The horrendous loss of 401K savings by working people should be addressed by a heavy tax on the obscene profits accumulated by the rich investors. These funds would then be used to restore at least some of the 401K losses.

You must have a democrat financial advisor. Why didn't you invest in the same thing the rich guys did? My 401K never went below its inital start and is worth today what it was before the big crash. Now it did lose. It was worth more when the market was at 14,000 , but that was un-sustainable. Today the market is 12,000? and my value is the same now, maybe a little more, than it was at 12,000 before. Stock market values only count on the day you cash out. Anything else is just paper.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

SMC

In various posts, I have complained bitterly about the rape of the working class by the Wall Street banks and the complicity of our Federal government. Why aren't these criminals in jail? The laws are configured to punish the little guys while hoards of lawyers are able to get the rich off when and if they are charged with crimes. The horrendous loss of 401K savings by working people should be addressed by a heavy tax on the obscene profits accumulated by the rich investors. These funds would then be used to restore at least some of the 401K losses.

That's right, and that's why I did not expect you to join the chorus of those who seek to divert attention away from the real culprits.

[smc]

Originally Posted by franalexes

You must have a democrat financial advisor. Why didn't you invest in the same thing the rich guys did? My 401K never went below its inital start and is worth today what it was before the big crash. Now it did lose. It was worth more when the market was at 14,000 , but that was un-sustainable. Today the market is 12,000? and my value is the same now, maybe a little more, than it was at 12,000 before. Stock market values only count on the day you cash out. Anything else is just paper.

Note to all: "democrat" as used above in the quote has nothing to do with this discussion, and Fran knows it.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Surly Tracy you can come up with more bad things Democrats are fond of doing

Yeah, but I had to get to work...

Originally Posted by randolph

and yes the ACLU is another awful organization. Unions of course harbor criminals and other bad types. And LIBERALS, gasp, oh horrors! How can upright honest decent conservative Republicans stand to live in the same country with all this riff raff. It's truly disgusting.

absolutely!

Originally Posted by randolph

Oh, by the way, Tracy did you know that there are actually poor conservatives that have criminal records and quite a few are in JAIL. OMG how can that happen?

Yes, of course there are conservatives in jail, but they aren't politicians are they? Well maybe a couple are, but I'm talking about how politicians in office and political organizations operate, not random citizens who find themselves in jail.

Originally Posted by randolph

Something has to be done to protect conservatives from this relentless thrust by evil LIBERALS to take over the country.

Exactly!

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Yeah, but I had to get to work...

absolutely!


Yes, of course there are conservatives in jail, but they aren't politicians are they? Well maybe a couple are, but I'm talking about how politicians in office and political organizations operate, not random citizens who find themselves in jail.

Exactly!

Wow, it's even easier simply to agree with sarcastic remarks that the OP doesn't really believe than to regurgitate the asinine and factually incorrect "talking points" of your typical posts, isn't it, Tracy?

Randolph should think twice before becoming an enabler.

[randolph]

SMC

Randolph should think twice before becoming an enabler.

Hey, the only enabling I would like to do would be enabling a cute shemale to cum all over my tonsils.
Gulp, gag, cough, swallow, oh so yummy!

[Buddy]

The reason why Obamacare was such a Democatic victory is that over the years, democrats and republicans are going to share leadership time, hippies will buy cadillacs and rednecks will grow long hair, and the Supreme Court will sway from liberal to conservative. But Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, these have roots that are here to stay.
With the decline of the 30 year job, and the 30 year mortgage, the middle class is losing solid ground. There was a survey done that found that people who make over 75 grand a year are HAPPY, and people who make less than 75 grand a year are UNHAPPY. No wonder the large percentage of people hate all government. Something's got to give, whether it be legalized pot, or war with Mexico. Cheap labor is the new OIL.

[Buddy]

Another used car salesman in the spotlight, this guy forgot to spray his bald spot after he shined his shoes. Make sure the camera catches his front, because his haircut has a hole in it. Look out for him in 2012.

[randolph]

Buddy

Something's got to give, whether it be legalized pot, or war with Mexico. Cheap labor is the new OIL

Hey legalized pot! Perhaps if the politicians had a little pot, they wouldn't be so interested in going to war. Oh wait! If we took over Mexico, the pot would cheaper and the immigrant problem would go away. But first, we should take over Canada, they have more oil and good healthcare.

[Buddy]

Originally Posted by randolph

Buddy

Hey legalized pot! Perhaps if the politicians had a little pot, they wouldn't be so interested in going to war. Oh wait! If we took over Mexico, the pot would cheaper and the immigrant problem would go away. But first, we should take over Canada, they have more oil and good healthcare.

I considered that, but the Republicans would object to war with Canada, cause they speak American there.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by Buddy

I considered that, but the Republicans would object to war with Canada, cause they speak American there.

Gasp, do you really think Canadians speak American?
I think Ila will have something to say about that.

[ila]

Originally Posted by randolph

Buddy

Hey legalized pot! Perhaps if the politicians had a little pot, they wouldn't be so interested in going to war. Oh wait! If we took over Mexico, the pot would cheaper and the immigrant problem would go away. But first, we should take over Canada, they have more oil and good healthcare.

Your country has tried it several times before and always lost. You might as well give up any future attempts. The only reason Canada hasn't taken over the US is because we don't need the trillions in debt that your country is amassing.

Originally Posted by Buddy

I considered that, but the Republicans would object to war with Canada, cause they speak American there.

Originally Posted by randolph

Gasp, do you really think Canadians speak American?
I think Ila will have something to say about that.

You are most definitely right, randolph. We speak correct English here and not American.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by ila

You are most definitely right, randolph. We speak correct English here and not American.

Polar bears can speak English?

[ila]

Originally Posted by The Conquistador

Polar bears can speak English?

You bet. I've heard that some penguins are good at it too.

[franalexes]

Originally Posted by ila

You bet. I've heard that some penguins are good at it too.

At least penguins have the good taste to wear tuxedoes; not some frumpy old fur coat.
I suppose polar bears also think they have the cutest looking T-girls?
( calling 'Sully for a second opinion)