The General Politics Thread

The_Annoying_Frenchman

Paranoia with (too few) hints of sanity.

cry_of_the_banshee

The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Paranoia with (too few) hints of sanity.

Why?

The_Annoying_Frenchman

Why not?

C_Chulainn

cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
OHHH THE STUPID, IT BURNS!!!
I'm sure it must.
Sorry, I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher and got really really depressed.
Guests and topic?

Eliot Spitzer (Democrat with social democratic views), Margaret Hoover (conservative Republican) and Matt Kibbe, the CEO of Tea Party company FreedomWorks. They were talking about why America was in debt. Spitzer kept trying to present a reasoned argument for the causes (wars, recession, tax cuts to the rich, etc) while Hoover did nothing but bleat how it had "tripled under Obama!" or something like that, even drowning out Maher when he tried to point out that Obama's spending only accounted for about 7 percent of the debt (or some other low number, I can't remember exactly). Sure, maybe the only people who watch Maher are already left-leaning, but that's the shit that happens everywhere else. No one is ever going to listen to someone try to explain why we're in debt when you've got a demagogic, politicizing foghorn hyperventilating about a really easy target.

I had to turn it off halfway through, it really depressed me.

cry_of_the_banshee

The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Why not?

Listen, do you want to discuss this like an adult or not?

cry_of_the_banshee

Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
OHHH THE STUPID, IT BURNS!!!
I'm sure it must.
Sorry, I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher and got really really depressed.
Guests and topic?
Eliot Spitzer (Democrat with social democratic views), Margaret Hoover (conservative Republican) and Matt Kibbe, the CEO of Tea Party company FreedomWorks. They were talking about why America was in debt. Spitzer kept trying to present a reasoned argument for the causes (wars, recession, tax cuts to the rich, etc) while Hoover did nothing but bleat how it had "tripled under Obama!" or something like that, even drowning out Maher when he tried to point out that Obama's spending only accounted for about 7 percent of the debt (or some other low number, I can't remember exactly). Sure, maybe the only people who watch Maher are already left-leaning, but that's the shit that happens everywhere else. No one is ever going to listen to someone try to explain why we're in debt when you've got a demagogic, politicizing foghorn hyperventilating about a really easy target.I had to turn it off halfway through, it really depressed me.

Ther's too much blame to go around; trying to pin it on one admistration or Congress is, as you said, nothing but demagoguery.

C_Chulainn

cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
OHHH THE STUPID, IT BURNS!!!
I'm sure it must.
Sorry, I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher and got really really depressed.
Guests and topic?
Eliot Spitzer (Democrat with social democratic views), Margaret Hoover (conservative Republican) and Matt Kibbe, the CEO of Tea Party company FreedomWorks. They were talking about why America was in debt. Spitzer kept trying to present a reasoned argument for the causes (wars, recession, tax cuts to the rich, etc) while Hoover did nothing but bleat how it had "tripled under Obama!" or something like that, even drowning out Maher when he tried to point out that Obama's spending only accounted for about 7 percent of the debt (or some other low number, I can't remember exactly). Sure, maybe the only people who watch Maher are already left-leaning, but that's the shit that happens everywhere else. No one is ever going to listen to someone try to explain why we're in debt when you've got a demagogic, politicizing foghorn hyperventilating about a really easy target.I had to turn it off halfway through, it really depressed me.
Ther's too much blame to go around; trying to pinpoint on one admistration or Congress is, as you said, nothing but demagoguery.

But that's what pissed me off. Spitzer wasn't being partisan or even polemical, he was trying to give the reasons for the debt and what policies caused them, while Hoover was intent on pinning all the blame on Obama.

Ok, sure, there's blame to go around, but surely, Obama's stimulus bill was nothing compared to Bush's tax cuts?

cry_of_the_banshee

Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
Cú Chulainn wrote
OHHH THE STUPID, IT BURNS!!!
I'm sure it must.
Sorry, I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher and got really really depressed.
Guests and topic?
Eliot Spitzer (Democrat with social democratic views), Margaret Hoover (conservative Republican) and Matt Kibbe, the CEO of Tea Party company FreedomWorks. They were talking about why America was in debt. Spitzer kept trying to present a reasoned argument for the causes (wars, recession, tax cuts to the rich, etc) while Hoover did nothing but bleat how it had "tripled under Obama!" or something like that, even drowning out Maher when he tried to point out that Obama's spending only accounted for about 7 percent of the debt (or some other low number, I can't remember exactly). Sure, maybe the only people who watch Maher are already left-leaning, but that's the shit that happens everywhere else. No one is ever going to listen to someone try to explain why we're in debt when you've got a demagogic, politicizing foghorn hyperventilating about a really easy target.I had to turn it off halfway through, it really depressed me.
Ther's too much blame to go around; trying to pinpoint on one admistration or Congress is, as you said, nothing but demagoguery.
But that's what pissed me off. Spitzer wasn't being partisan or even polemical, he was trying to give the reasons for the debt and what policies caused them, while Hoover was intent on pinning all the blame on Obama.Ok, sure, there's blame to go around, but surely, Obama's stimulus bill was nothing compared to Bush's tax cuts?

You know my position on this, no need to beat a dead horse. Bush lit the match and Obama poured gasoline on the fire.

Our government is rotten to the core, and they are all equally guilty as far as I am concerned.

cry_of_the_banshee

cry of the banshee wrote
The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Why not?
Listen, do you want to discuss this like an adult or not?

And, once again, it's adieu.

:lol:

Like I said...

The_Annoying_Frenchman

cry of the banshee wrote
The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Why not?
Listen, do you want to discuss this like an adult or not?And, once again, it's adieu.:lol:Like I said...

Why would I want to discuss something I don't believe exists in the first place? That some diaspora might exist is a reality, that some people belonging to said diaspora might work as lobbyists, you won't see me denying does that automatically leads to "teh greet conspiracee of those jews exploiting the blood of us"? No, that's where paranoia kicks. And it's a well known theme of extreme right & left (yes! both! they need spapegoats, you see...) political organisations, one of those we've heard so much about it kind of became... Silly.
So, see, there's no way I can debate your paranoid stance and no way I could ever change your mind about it so I'd rather leave it at that.

cry_of_the_banshee

The Annoying Frenchman wrote
cry of the banshee wrote
The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Why not?
Listen, do you want to discuss this like an adult or not?And, once again, it's adieu.:lol:Like I said...
Why would I want to discuss something I don't believe exists in the first place? That some diaspora might exist is a reality, that some people belonging to said diaspora might work as lobbyists, you won't see me denying does that automatically leads to "teh greet conspiracee of those jews exploiting the blood of us"? No, that's where paranoia kicks. And it's a well known theme of extreme right & left (yes! both! they need spapegoats, you see...) political organisations, one of those we've heard so much about it kind of became... Silly.So, see, there's no way I can debate your paranoid stance and no way I could ever change your mind about it so I'd rather leave it at that.

My paranoid stance? Conspiracy? Nice tactic, but it won't work, and if you were capable of paying attention, you would know that by now.
Won't be long until you reort to the tried and true clamor of "ANTI-SEMITE!"

Are you denying that the Israel lobby has an undue influence on American policy?
There is plenty of credible dataout there to suggest that it's not quite the case of paranoia you like to try and use to dissemble discussion on the topic.

So, why do you believe it doesn't exist?
You see, you have to back up your assertions with some data.

cry_of_the_banshee

:lol:

Just as I thought.

The_Annoying_Frenchman

Some have lives, Val'. I cannot spend my whole life answering on forums, you see.

Now, I will first need you to prove your assertions since you've shown nothing.

So, since "There is plenty of credible dataout there to suggest that it's not quite the case of paranoia", I'd like you to display some of it.

cry_of_the_banshee

The Annoying Frenchman wrote
Some have lives, Val'. I cannot spend my whole life answering on forums, you see.Now, I will first need you to prove your assertions since you've shown nothing.So, since "There is plenty of credible dataout there to suggest that it's not quite the case of paranoia", I'd like you to display some of it.

Here's one for starters.
Although, I never asserted anything one way or the other regarding the matter.

<a class="postlink" href="http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/A0040.pdf">http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/A0040.pdf</a>

Also, do a little research; ever hear of AIPAC? JINSA?
There are others, as well.

The_Annoying_Frenchman

If you don't mind, I'll read it tomorrow at work if I have time.
I'll get back to you.

cry_of_the_banshee

The Annoying Frenchman wrote
If you don't mind, I'll read it tomorrow at work if I have time.I'll get back to you.

Sure.

C_Chulainn

cry of the banshee wrote
The Annoying Frenchman wrote
If you don't mind, I'll read it tomorrow at work if I have time.I'll get back to you.
Sure.

stevelovesmoonspell

GeneralDiomedes

Like the storied warrior kings of yore

dead1

Is (the current version of) democracy failing?

I've noticed over the last several years the following developments (mainly in Australia but also Britain and US):

Politicians attention span growing every shorter and now focused purely on sound bites for today's new consumption.
No real policy differentiation between major parties.
No real ideological differentiation between major parties (most seem to sit on centre-right scale of the spectrum).
Often act against public opinion - e.g. crappy little wars, carbon tax in Australia, pulp mill in Tasmania.
Increasing loss of democratic rights since 9-11: e.g. Patriot Act, increased monitoring of electronic communications, increased restrictions in terms of protesting or industrial actions.
Unwillingness to take any responsibility for departments they are nominally in charge of especially when issues arise.
Irresponsible vote buying with unnecessary expensive projects of dubious merit.

Has democracy in it's current form (and in Britain and Australia at least) shot it's bolt?

Does it need reform to put it back on track.

« Previous Page Next Page »