Communist + White House =/= United States

[PLAYER57832]

Yes, it was pretty progressive to be opposed to lynching.. not sure how you got the idea that being progressive was a bad thing, though.

Bigger government, reliance upon government, enslavement by the government, choosing of which businesses/groups succeed and which ones fail, destroying free market system, increasing the power of the government, favoring international governments over our own governments, removing powers from the states, etc.

I'd say those are all pretty bad things.

Exageration and blinkered thinking are also pretty bad things

Where is the exaggeration?

Government spending has increased by almost $2 trillion since 2000.

The population has expanded as well, as has inflation.

And.. more important than the money is what government does with that money and why. We are now in 3 different wars, for example. Yet, funny.. its not those that you are asking to be cut, its social security and Medicare.. and to continue big business tax breaks.

17.9% (1st quarter 2010) of all personal income comes from the federal government.

That requires explanation.

however, from the outset, acknowledge that being a war means a lot of armed services AND government contracted services to support those men and women (and government contracted services is a HUGE boondoggle, largely brought on by the likes of you "small government" types .. so that Bush, etc could show they were "shrinking the size of government".. nevermind that they were also padding the coffers of Cheney, et al).

ALSO, unemployment has been at an alltime high.

We now have policies to provide for the "needs" of people from the day they're born to the day they die.

Yes. And your alternative is that needs are not met. Sorry, poor choice. The rest of us happen to think kids starving and going without vaccinations and glasses is not a good thing.

People no longer have to actually work to earn money if they no longer want to.

They do as much as they ever had to. However, we have expanded the list of people not forced to work to include a number of disabled individuals and the elderly. I do take issue with some of the disabled categories (not getting into that here, though). The elderly.. if you have worked all your life, then yes, at some point society does owe you a living in return.

US spent BILLIONS of dollars to "save" certain banks (at their discretion) as well as US automakers (even though they refused to help many dealers who actually sell those cars). The US should be bailing out exactly 0 businesses.

Noargumetn with me there, but not sure how that applies to what you were saying earlier. Seems like it rather matches what the rest of us have been saying.

See, for some reason you want to claim that tax breaks are not "bailing out" businesses.

Massive regulations require businesses of all kinds and sizes to jump through a myriad of hoops just to start or run their business. Regulations have grown by the thousands simply because more administrators want to control more areas of commerce.

LOL.. again with the exaggerations.

Could some rules be eliminated? Sure. However, by and large the biggest problem is too few regulations to protect consumers and average people. Credit card companies are classic abusers. A fixed rate should be a fixed rate, not something that expires in 6 months. If I am promised 2% or 15.99% or even 20%, I ought to be able to know that is my rate, not find out 6 months later that ..."gee, your credit rating is not good enough.. so we are going to boost it to 30%. Fees should be upfront and reasonably assessed as well.. none of this "it doesn't matter when you mail a payment, if our mail clerks don't put it on the correct desk by 12 noon, then you are out of luck" garbage.

Again, I happen to like having safe food, clean water, etc.

Many government officials and even some judges believe that US law needs to be interpreted NOT in light of the US Constitution, but by using international laws. They believe the US needs to be subservient to the UN instead of looking out for our best interests.

NIce broad statement. Care to clarify with some specifics?

The states have lost almost ALL their sovereignty. They must either ask the federal government permission for the laws they have, or constantly live in fear that the federal government will swoop in and arbitrarily dismantle their laws. States no longer have the power to decide what's best for their citizens as our country must operate under a one-size-fits-all policy from the federal government.

Yes, such a terrible thing that Mississippi actually has to honor mixed race marriages and that whites in the south have to sit in the same restaurants as blacks.

Sorry, it's not exaggeration when it's reality.

Problem is, its not truly reality.

[PLAYER57832]

Yes, it was pretty progressive to be opposed to lynching.. not sure how you got the idea that being progressive was a bad thing, though.

I see, so if we give bare facts about industry everything bad is an "exception", but you are allowed to throw out these innane, not even truly defined innanities and gross exaggerations as if they were simply "fact">

And you wonder why the right keeps getting labeled as "uneducated and unthinking?"
You do real, thinking conservatives a gross disservice. (disagree with their ideas, though I often do).

Just because I believe big government is bad doesn't make me "uneducated and unthinking". It's telling how the only people who can be considered educated are those who believe in progressive ideals. So much for the freedom of speech and ideas.

Who said anything about "only those who believe in progressive ideals" being educated. I believe I was pretty specific about YOU giving other conservatives a bad name through your narrow minded idiocy.

Like I said, if you think considering racial and gender equality something "progressive", then I am afraid you consider the overwhelming majority of Americans, including most politicians, to be highly "progressive".

[Night Strike]

In back-to-back posts, player goes and plays the race card. Anytime someone decries the increases in the size of the federal government, it's blamed on that person wanting to return to racist policies. It's a LIE!

Government spending has increased by almost $2 trillion since 2000.

The population has expanded as well, as has inflation.

And.. more important than the money is what government does with that money and why. We are now in 3 different wars, for example. Yet, funny.. its not those that you are asking to be cut, its social security and Medicare.. and to continue big business tax breaks.

Sorry, let me more specific: Government SPENDING has almost DOUBLED since 2000. It took 224 years for the government to reach $2 trillion, but we're going to reach $4 trillion in less than 20 years, if not less than 15 years. Yet people think that's a good thing?? And something that's sustainable?? Oh yeah, and remember, according to the government, there is NO inflation. Oops, more lies. By the way tax breaks have exactly 0 to do with government spending as they concern government revenues.

ALSO, unemployment has been at an alltime high.

Another entitlement that the government should not be providing, especially when they continue to raise the time of eligibility.

Massive regulations require businesses of all kinds and sizes to jump through a myriad of hoops just to start or run their business. Regulations have grown by the thousands simply because more administrators want to control more areas of commerce.

LOL.. again with the exaggerations.

Could some rules be eliminated? Sure. However, by and large the biggest problem is too few regulations to protect consumers and average people. Credit card companies are classic abusers. A fixed rate should be a fixed rate, not something that expires in 6 months. If I am promised 2% or 15.99% or even 20%, I ought to be able to know that is my rate, not find out 6 months later that ..."gee, your credit rating is not good enough.. so we are going to boost it to 30%. Fees should be upfront and reasonably assessed as well.. none of this "it doesn't matter when you mail a payment, if our mail clerks don't put it on the correct desk by 12 noon, then you are out of luck" garbage.

1) Learn to read the fine print. It's no one else's fault if you don't read the fine print and realize that the fixed rate is only for a definite amount of time.
2) I'm guessing your hypothetical case of lost mail accounts for a fleetingly small percentage of rate increases, and those should end up with breaks to the consumer and disciplinary actions of employees, but all of that is the business's responsibility, not the government's. If the business screws over the customer, the customer will take their business elsewhere. We don't get that option when the federal government screws us over.
3) Stop using credit cards!! If you hate the practices of the credit card companies, STOP GIVING THEM YOUR BUSINESS!! It's quite simple really. They run a business and you either buy from them or you don't. If you don't like their product, you have no right to cry to the government and force them to change their business practices to something you deem acceptable. Just stop buying their product! Besides, we all know that continuing to spend money you don't have (credit) is not only a poor personal problem, but also contributed to our recession.

The states have lost almost ALL their sovereignty. They must either ask the federal government permission for the laws they have, or constantly live in fear that the federal government will swoop in and arbitrarily dismantle their laws. States no longer have the power to decide what's best for their citizens as our country must operate under a one-size-fits-all policy from the federal government.

Yes, such a terrible thing that Mississippi actually has to honor mixed race marriages and that whites in the south have to sit in the same restaurants as blacks.

States can't allow their police officers to assist in carrying out federal laws. States aren't allowed to decline federal dollars (and strings). States aren't allowed to opt out of federal (unconstitutional) mandates. Etc. Sorry, but there are MANY areas of federal encroachment on state rights than your desire to make this situation all about race. No one can ever have an honest debate when all we hear from the left is that we want to return to racist polices.

[PLAYER57832]

In back-to-back posts, player goes and plays the race card. Anytime someone decries the increases in the size of the federal government, it's blamed on that person wanting to return to racist policies. It's a LIE!

lol.. nice attempt to twist. You began with the broad claims. We were merely pointing out your hypocrisy and lack of detail.

Like I said before, we bring up examples and you decry "exaggerations"... "not the topic"..e tc, etc. Yet, you make even broader claims as if they were pure fact.

Government spending has increased by almost $2 trillion since 2000.

The population has expanded as well, as has inflation.

And.. more important than the money is what government does with that money and why. We are now in 3 different wars, for example. Yet, funny.. its not those that you are asking to be cut, its social security and Medicare.. and to continue big business tax breaks.

Sorry, let me more specific: Government SPENDING has almost DOUBLED since 2000. It took 224 years for the government to reach $2 trillion, but we're going to reach $4 trillion in less than 20 years, if not less than 15 years. Yet people think that's a good thing?? And something that's sustainable?? Oh yeah, and remember, according to the government, there is NO inflation. Oops, more lies. By the way tax breaks have exactly 0 to do with government spending as they concern government revenues.

Try again. Just looking at numbers tells nothing. And since when does the government claim there has been no inflation????

ALSO, unemployment has been at an alltime high.

Another entitlement that the government should not be providing, especially when they continue to raise the time of eligibility.

Interesting ideas you have. Unemployment INSURANCE is one of the things that is keeping our economy from truly going into the tank even more than it already is. And.. though I definitely don't agree with unlimited unemployment benefits, those soceital economic benefits (and by "societal", I definitely mean not just average people but big businesses), are why these benefits have been expanded.. because without them our economy would go even further into the tank.

and that's without even getting into all the many tax breaks, the fact that these employers getting such huge profits are allowed to pay employees piddly amounts, etc.

Massive regulations require businesses of all kinds and sizes to jump through a myriad of hoops just to start or run their business. Regulations have grown by the thousands simply because more administrators want to control more areas of commerce.

LOL.. again with the exaggerations.

Could some rules be eliminated? Sure. However, by and large the biggest problem is too few regulations to protect consumers and average people. Credit card companies are classic abusers. A fixed rate should be a fixed rate, not something that expires in 6 months. If I am promised 2% or 15.99% or even 20%, I ought to be able to know that is my rate, not find out 6 months later that ..."gee, your credit rating is not good enough.. so we are going to boost it to 30%. Fees should be upfront and reasonably assessed as well.. none of this "it doesn't matter when you mail a payment, if our mail clerks don't put it on the correct desk by 12 noon, then you are out of luck" garbage.

1) Learn to read the fine print. It's no one else's fault if you don't read the fine print and realize that the fixed rate is only for a definite amount of time.

BULL.
Look up the definition of "fixed". People ought to be able to believe what they read, not have to dig through pages and pages of gobbledy gook.. and it IS "gobbledy gook" when even PhD Harbard MBA graduates have trouble wading through the fine print. There is nothing so obscure about credit that such lengthy and obscure contracts are necessary.. except that it gives the credit card companies plenty of opportunity to take advantage of people without MBAs.

If they want to vary it, then call it a variable rate. However, your age is also showing. See, this little clause was snuck in to many, many people's contract after they had already signed up, already accrued debt. Thirty years ago a fixed rate WAS a fixed rate.

2) I'm guessing your hypothetical case of lost mail accounts for a fleetingly small percentage of rate increases, and those should end up with breaks to the consumer and disciplinary actions of employees, but all of that is the business's responsibility, not the government's.

These are not at all hypothetical situations. It is standard operating procedure for companies as far-ranging as American Express, Discover, etc. And, if you like I can give you about a hundred more real and very widespread examples of how credit card companies go out of their way to bilk customers.

Many of us are now able to avoid these to some extent by going to automatic payments, which even credit care companies cannot deny recieving. However, again, you date yourself. Those easy automatic payment systems were not so readily available even 10 years ago.. never mind 20. (back then, most automatic payment plans involved the bank cutting a physical check and mailing it).

And..business "responsibility" or not, exactly how is a customer supposed to force a credit card company to honor their agreements without the threat of court action? Even WITH court action, they still thumb their noses at us.

If the business screws over the customer, the customer will take their business elsewhere.

Really? How are you supposed to transfer a credit card balance when the company has nicely dumped your credit rating?

And before you start crying "responsibility!", everyone, NO exceptions!.. everyone I know had their credit card interest charges increased just before Obama went into office, sometimes doubled and tripled. Are you trying to imply that ALL of those people are universally "irrespeonsible"? PLUS, their monthly required payments went up. In many cases, they were assessed late fees because the due dates were changed with very, very little or no notice. (I normally would have cought it no matter how obscure the notice, but my father-in-law was in the process of dying, so when my automatic payment was $20 short out of about $300 owed, and I paid it a day too late... My interest rate went up by 10%, PLUS I was assessed late fees... and the decrease in my credit rating meant that all the other cards went up again, even more than they already had because of the "we are worried about Obama" bit).

We don't get that option when the federal government screws us over.

Sure you do. You can go to court. In some cases, you can even get a free, government-paid attorney to do it, but you can also look to groups like the ACLU to take up your case (or just pay your own fees).

3) Stop using credit cards!! If you hate the practices of the credit card companies, STOP GIVING THEM YOUR BUSINESS!! It's quite simple really.

1.These changes were made AFTER the cards were begun. Credit companies are now allowed to make essentially whatever changes they wish. You can read your agreements all you want, but there is that little clause at the bottom that makes it all meaningless saying (essentially) that they can alter the agreement whenever they wish however they wish and that in many cases they don't even have to notify you in advance. When they do have to notify you, it can be one sentence in a 2 page very fine print, very complex document. I agree that credit companies have the right to charge whatever they want, basically set what fees they like, but I do not agree that they have the right to change terms constantly making it literally impossible for most people to keep up. This is not about responding to real economic demands, it is plain intentional bilking.

2. Try to exist today without a credit card? Many employers use credit rating to decide if they will hire someone today! Without a credit card, you have to walk around with piles of cash or don't buy anything. I wind up paying over $100 for groceries now on a regular basis.. and I shop cheaply!

3. When you get repeated calls from collection agencies for a medical bill ..and I mean multiple calls every day.. and you are dealing with a sick child, (in my case including 5 days for myself and him in the hospital with no notice), a vehicle that the (mandatory.. because of very limited parking) children's hospital "vallet" service crashed, and other issues besides.. sometimes you wind up putting stuff on credit cards because you just don't have the energy to fight. And, if you think the collection/credit card agencies are not fully aware of that, you are very naive

They run a business and you either buy from them or you don't. If you don't like their product, you have no right to cry to the government and force them to change their business practices to something you deem acceptable. Just stop buying their product! Besides, we all know that continuing to spend money you don't have (credit) is not only a poor personal problem, but also contributed to our recession.

read above

The states have lost almost ALL their sovereignty. They must either ask the federal government permission for the laws they have, or constantly live in fear that the federal government will swoop in and arbitrarily dismantle their laws. States no longer have the power to decide what's best for their citizens as our country must operate under a one-size-fits-all policy from the federal government.

Yes, such a terrible thing that Mississippi actually has to honor mixed race marriages and that whites in the south have to sit in the same restaurants as blacks.

States can't allow their police officers to assist in carrying out federal laws. States aren't allowed to decline federal dollars (and strings). States aren't allowed to opt out of federal (unconstitutional) mandates. Etc. Sorry, but there are MANY areas of federal encroachment on state rights than your desire to make this situation all about race. No one can ever have an honest debate when all we hear from the left is that we want to return to racist polices.

[/quote]
Like I said, sure there are areas that could be improved. However, when you make such broad, sweeping claims as you did above you don't get to say "oh yes, well.. I did not mean that"(and, frankly, have a strong tendency to do, even while criticizing anybody else for making far less sweeping claims opposing your views).

You want to make generalities, insist they are true, and then proceed to ignore so many details and exceptions its no wonder you can even stand up straight with all the bending and twisting you keep doing.

Besides, we all know that continuing to spend money you don't have (credit) is not only a poor personal problem, but also contributed to our recession.

Oh, and because you keep bringing this garbage up, let me clarify that we are paying ALL our bills. I do without nice clothes, I don't get to take my kids places and cannot enroll in college programs that would allow me to reenter the workforce because I have to pay several thousand dollars in excess interest and fees.

Even so, we survive... except I now lack medical insurance, so if anything does happen to me, it will become your and every other taxpayer's burden while the insurance companies and credit card companies to whom I have paid so much sit back and laugh.

[SirSebstar]

The OP wrote about Van Jones.

I think if this person was, in fact, a member of an organization which wanted a revolution in the United States, this person is, at best, not someone who wants what's best for the United States as it is currently constituted. A revolution necessitates that the currently elected democratic government be overthrown in favor of some other type of government. So, while it may be comical and fun to bash the bashers of Van Jones, or while it may seem to be enlightening to have no problem with him, if Van Jones has some convictions along with his belief, he is certainly not someone who should be involved in the U.S. government.

Because someone critzices government he sould NOT be allowed to get into said government? Thank you for letting the democratic proces work.. He was voted in by congress, so clearly the powers that you(as a society) elected thought they know better then you...
Also, it is best to get people who lead critique groups to get them a position in the gov. There is a lot wrong with political systems, but the worst is lack of internal critique and general awareness of what some policies really mean!
What I basicly get from your statement is that you cannot have critique on the government (exept you ofcourse) and that if anything is wrong with the system, thats okay because it is democratic...
yea. right.
There is a lot wrong. It takes dedication and hard work to set things right, or at least make it so that gov does not make it worse.

Back to last posts. since 2000 the USA lend more money then ever before... Wars are however extremly costly, next to that the USA is the first democracy to start a war so isn't it about time to end that nonsense and go back to normally making money? Stop interfering in the rest of the world, wright the wrongs in your own country and shut up.
simple effective and utopian, but hey. why not?

[PLAYER57832]

I think if this person was, in fact, a member of an organization which wanted a revolution in the United States, this person is, at best, not someone who wants what's best for the United States as it is currently constituted. A revolution necessitates that the currently elected democratic government be overthrown in favor of some other type of government. So, while it may be comical and fun to bash the bashers of Van Jones, or while it may seem to be enlightening to have no problem with him, if Van Jones has some convictions along with his belief, he is certainly not someone who should be involved in the U.S. government.

The highest form of patriotism is protest.

[AndyDufresne]

Yes, it was pretty progressive to be opposed to lynching.. not sure how you got the idea that being progressive was a bad thing, though.

Bigger government, reliance upon government, enslavement by the government, choosing of which businesses/groups succeed and which ones fail, destroying free market system, increasing the power of the government, favoring international governments over our own governments, removing powers from the states, etc.

I'd say those are all pretty bad things.

Viva la Revolucion!


--Andy

[PLAYER57832]

Yes, it was pretty progressive to be opposed to lynching.. not sure how you got the idea that being progressive was a bad thing, though.

Bigger government, reliance upon government, enslavement by the government, choosing of which businesses/groups succeed and which ones fail, destroying free market system, increasing the power of the government, favoring international governments over our own governments, removing powers from the states, etc.

I'd say those are all pretty bad things.

I said how did you get the idea that being progressive is a bad thing. All you gave is a litteny of unexplained code words for "we don't like any opposition to business being in control at all".