Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: 2012 Elections - Page 280







Post#6976 at 02-11-2012 05:02 AM by '58 Flat [at Hardhat From Central Jersey joined Jul 2001 #posts 3,300]
---
02-11-2012, 05:02 AM #6976
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Hardhat From Central Jersey
Posts
3,300

Of course the ultimate "compromise" is to go back to the drawing board and scrap ObamaCare in favor of single-payer - then this doesn't even come into play!
But maybe if the putative Robin Hoods stopped trying to take from law-abiding citizens and give to criminals, take from men and give to women, take from believers and give to anti-believers, take from citizens and give to "undocumented" immigrants, and take from heterosexuals and give to homosexuals, they might have a lot more success in taking from the rich and giving to everyone else.

Don't blame me - I'm a Baby Buster!







Post#6977 at 02-11-2012 06:28 AM by summer in the fall [at joined Jul 2011 #posts 1,540]
---
02-11-2012, 06:28 AM #6977
Join Date
Jul 2011
Posts
1,540

Quote Originally Posted by Child of Socrates View Post
Quote Originally Posted by summer in the fall View Post
I second that. There were at least two groups of "alls." There were the "alls" proselytizing the doom and gloom of this country via Obama's eventful demise and the "alls" predicting something a whole lot less sinister.

Cheers

ETA: When Obama mastered the debt ceiling debacle without creating a Constitutional crises, he proved his politics proficiency in teasing out the latter.
I aspire to his level of equanimity.
Oooo, I do as well.

Cheers.







Post#6978 at 02-11-2012 08:54 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-11-2012, 08:54 AM #6978
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

The compromise preserves women's rights to contraception through insurance so I'm not going to complain. However, I cringe at the way the White House is so terrified of doing anything that makes Obama look like what the Republicans say he is. Since in many ways I wish he were more like what they say he is, it's depressing. However, politically he was doing very well while they tore each other apart, and I'm sure they didn't want to move the focus to themselves. Which makes sense.







Post#6979 at 02-11-2012 10:13 AM by pizal81 [at China joined May 2010 #posts 2,392]
---
02-11-2012, 10:13 AM #6979
Join Date
May 2010
Location
China
Posts
2,392

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
The compromise preserves women's rights to contraception through insurance so I'm not going to complain. However, I cringe at the way the White House is so terrified of doing anything that makes Obama look like what the Republicans say he is. Since in many ways I wish he were more like what they say he is, it's depressing. However, politically he was doing very well while they tore each other apart, and I'm sure they didn't want to move the focus to themselves. Which makes sense.
He might as well act the part if that's what he actually believes is right. Most of my right wings friends and family HATE Obama. My own parents are more reasonable. They don't demonize the man even though they may not agree with his ideals. What is true of my parents is not true of my other relatives especially in the south. Last year after the Arizona shooting Obama came on to give a speech and they were just disgusted that people were applauding him and were like "Change the channel." I was shocked how anti Obama they were. It's all from demonizing of the man though. Calling him socialist and what not. If any of it were true I think he would be a dangerous president. His goal was never to be leftist as president as far as I can tell, but to bring compromise back into politics. That just isn't happening though. Point being is that no matter what he says or does many on the right think the man is a socialist who wants to attack our freedoms.
Last edited by pizal81; 02-11-2012 at 10:15 AM.







Post#6980 at 02-11-2012 10:13 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
02-11-2012, 10:13 AM #6980
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
The compromise preserves women's rights to contraception through insurance so I'm not going to complain. However, I cringe at the way the White House is so terrified of doing anything that makes Obama look like what the Republicans say he is. Since in many ways I wish he were more like what they say he is, it's depressing. However, politically he was doing very well while they tore each other apart, and I'm sure they didn't want to move the focus to themselves. Which makes sense.
This is about posturing and spinning. The Republicans tried to make this about "religious liberty" and Obama, as he frequently does, came up with an elegant solution and played the perfect game of political rope-a-dope with them.

In the end, he looks reasonable, and they look shrill and ridiculous.







Post#6981 at 02-11-2012 10:36 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 10:36 AM #6981
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
The compromise preserves women's rights to contraception through insurance so I'm not going to complain. However, I cringe at the way the White House is so terrified of doing anything that makes Obama look like what the Republicans say he is. Since in many ways I wish he were more like what they say he is, it's depressing. However, politically he was doing very well while they tore each other apart, and I'm sure they didn't want to move the focus to themselves. Which makes sense.
Like you, I favor the result, but not the process of achieving it. Liberal policies will remain in the pariah category unless someone, or preferalby many someones, start promoting them as correct, proper and wise. Hiding in the shadows is, frankly, humiliating.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#6982 at 02-11-2012 10:39 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 10:39 AM #6982
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Child of Socrates View Post
This is about posturing and spinning. The Republicans tried to make this about "religious liberty" and Obama, as he frequently does, came up with an elegant solution and played the perfect game of political rope-a-dope with them.

In the end, he looks reasonable, and they look shrill and ridiculous.
Good on the tactical level; not so good on the strategic.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#6983 at 02-11-2012 10:52 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-11-2012, 10:52 AM #6983
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
Like you, I favor the result, but not the process of achieving it. Liberal policies will remain in the pariah category unless someone, or preferalby many someones, start promoting them as correct, proper and wise. Hiding in the shadows is, frankly, humiliating.
Exactly. I'm trying to think of an earlier parallel in our history and I'm coming up empty.







Post#6984 at 02-11-2012 11:50 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
02-11-2012, 11:50 AM #6984
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
Good on the tactical level; not so good on the strategic.
I'm not sure that grand strategy is needed at this point when the opposition has proven so good at tripping over its own feet.







Post#6985 at 02-11-2012 11:51 AM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
02-11-2012, 11:51 AM #6985
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
Exactly. I'm trying to think of an earlier parallel in our history and I'm coming up empty.
Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. Both were, in objective fact, moderates. Both were excoriated in a manner completely irrational as dangerous radicals, nay, even incarnations of Satan, by their political opponents. Both also were excoriated by the hard core on their own side as little if any short of traitors. Both ended up presiding over profound changes to the nation's governing and economic institutions, despite lack of ideological inclination to do so, because of the pressure of events. Regarding Lincoln, someone, I think it was William Lloyd Garrison in a letter to another abolitionist, made no effort to disguise the president's shortcomings, but presciently described him as a pawn capable of queening under the right circumstances, which in due course presented themselves.

It looks increasingly like Obama will be reelected. It will be interesting to watch what happens in his second term. In terms of saecular time-position, Obama's second term equals Roosevelt's first, and also what would have been Lincoln's second term but for Booth's bullet. The most important lasting changes of the Civil War Crisis occurred at that time (the 13th-15th Amendments, and the Reconstruction compromises). Most of the really important lasting changes of the Great Power Crisis also occurred in FDR's first term (Social Security, the Wagner Act), although the unionization of the workplace happened in his second and the move to superpower status in his third.

What I'm saying here is that we may see a very different course of events in Obama's second term than we did in his first.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#6986 at 02-11-2012 12:08 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 12:08 PM #6986
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Child of Socrates View Post
I'm not sure that grand strategy is needed at this point when the opposition has proven so good at tripping over its own feet.
It's always a good time to show you have a backbone. I have to hold my nose when I vote for most Dems, because they are patently unreliable. This year, Mittens has that franchise, so being stalwart will be even more impressive. They need to try it ... and soon.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#6987 at 02-11-2012 12:11 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 12:11 PM #6987
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. Both were, in objective fact, moderates. Both were excoriated in a manner completely irrational as dangerous radicals, nay, even incarnations of Satan, by their political opponents. Both also were excoriated by the hard core on their own side as little if any short of traitors. Both ended up presiding over profound changes to the nation's governing and economic institutions, despite lack of ideological inclination to do so, because of the pressure of events. Regarding Lincoln, someone, I think it was William Lloyd Garrison in a letter to another abolitionist, made no effort to disguise the president's shortcomings, but presciently described him as a pawn capable of queening under the right circumstances, which in due course presented themselves.

It looks increasingly like Obama will be reelected. It will be interesting to watch what happens in his second term. In terms of saecular time-position, Obama's second term equals Roosevelt's first, and also what would have been Lincoln's second term but for Booth's bullet. The most important lasting changes of the Civil War Crisis occurred at that time (the 13th-15th Amendments, and the Reconstruction compromises). Most of the really important lasting changes of the Great Power Crisis also occurred in FDR's first term (Social Security, the Wagner Act), although the unionization of the workplace happened in his second and the move to superpower status in his third.

What I'm saying here is that we may see a very different course of events in Obama's second term than we did in his first.
We can hope, though that didn't work so well last time. This time, we can demand, and see how that goes.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#6988 at 02-11-2012 12:29 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
02-11-2012, 12:29 PM #6988
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
We can hope, though that didn't work so well last time. This time, we can demand, and see how that goes.
Agreed, and, well, we are. That was what was missing originally. Probably it's the norm. Millennials are the generation driving the Crisis, just as we drove the Awakening, and they were at that time younger and more naive than they are now.

Mind you, not as naive as WE were.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#6989 at 02-11-2012 12:52 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-11-2012, 12:52 PM #6989
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. Both were, in objective fact, moderates. Both were excoriated in a manner completely irrational as dangerous radicals, nay, even incarnations of Satan, by their political opponents. Both also were excoriated by the hard core on their own side as little if any short of traitors. Both ended up presiding over profound changes to the nation's governing and economic institutions, despite lack of ideological inclination to do so, because of the pressure of events. Regarding Lincoln, someone, I think it was William Lloyd Garrison in a letter to another abolitionist, made no effort to disguise the president's shortcomings, but presciently described him as a pawn capable of queening under the right circumstances, which in due course presented themselves.

It looks increasingly like Obama will be reelected. It will be interesting to watch what happens in his second term. In terms of saecular time-position, Obama's second term equals Roosevelt's first, and also what would have been Lincoln's second term but for Booth's bullet. The most important lasting changes of the Civil War Crisis occurred at that time (the 13th-15th Amendments, and the Reconstruction compromises). Most of the really important lasting changes of the Great Power Crisis also occurred in FDR's first term (Social Security, the Wagner Act), although the unionization of the workplace happened in his second and the move to superpower status in his third.

What I'm saying here is that we may see a very different course of events in Obama's second term than we did in his first.
Then in 2016 we have to work out butts off so the next president is Liz Warren.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#6990 at 02-11-2012 12:54 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-11-2012, 12:54 PM #6990
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

I'm actually quote pleased with Obama's compromise, he just made the social conservatives look like the hysterical whiners they are.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#6991 at 02-11-2012 01:58 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
02-11-2012, 01:58 PM #6991
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. Both were, in objective fact, moderates. Both were excoriated in a manner completely irrational as dangerous radicals, nay, even incarnations of Satan, by their political opponents. Both also were excoriated by the hard core on their own side as little if any short of traitors. Both ended up presiding over profound changes to the nation's governing and economic institutions, despite lack of ideological inclination to do so, because of the pressure of events. Regarding Lincoln, someone, I think it was William Lloyd Garrison in a letter to another abolitionist, made no effort to disguise the president's shortcomings, but presciently described him as a pawn capable of queening under the right circumstances, which in due course presented themselves.

It looks increasingly like Obama will be reelected. It will be interesting to watch what happens in his second term. In terms of saecular time-position, Obama's second term equals Roosevelt's first, and also what would have been Lincoln's second term but for Booth's bullet. The most important lasting changes of the Civil War Crisis occurred at that time (the 13th-15th Amendments, and the Reconstruction compromises). Most of the really important lasting changes of the Great Power Crisis also occurred in FDR's first term (Social Security, the Wagner Act), although the unionization of the workplace happened in his second and the move to superpower status in his third.

What I'm saying here is that we may see a very different course of events in Obama's second term than we did in his first.
We have an awkward matchup of the Crises of 1940 and 2020 in that the political equivalent of 2006 (disgrace of the 3T coalition) came in 2006 before the economic meltdown that came from corresponding peaks in and 1929 and 2007. The 2010 election looks like a partial resurrection of the 3T agenda -- but that can be overturned. The meltdown that began in 1929 lasted three years; that of 2007 lasted roughly a year and a half even if it was nearly parallel to that point. The real crashes happened in 1930 and 2008. We effectively had half the severe meltdown of the 1929-1932 meltdown with a change of President and the direction of economic policy in the equivalent of 1930 -- this time. Had the Stock Market Crash of 1929 happened instead in 1931 would we have the same political result? I doubt it. Hoover didn't have bungled wars on his hands and had no political scandals; it was the bungled wars and abuse of power of the George W. Bush Administration that made possible the overturning of the House and Senate possible in 2006.

http://advisorperspectives.com/dshor...-bad-bears.gif

(Would someone please bring up that image?)

President Obama follows what may be the least competent and most dishonest President in our history. Herbert Hoover at the least had a moral compass even if his stewardship of the economy was execrable. James Buchanan was simply a man unsuited to the time in which he was President. Like Lincoln and FDR, Obama had a tough act to follow -- for a vaudeville equivalent, think of an act that requires consummate dexterity of the feet on a stage full of rotten vegetables from a previous act.

A Crisis forces the hand of any top leader, and a budgetary crisis could force changes in fiscal policies. Bad behavior of a 3T must die in a 4T even if that 3T behavior has powerful constituencies behind it. The ethos of Ayn Rand ("You need me, peon, but I don't need you; my greed is noble and sacred and you must defer to it; I've got mine -- $crew you!") that permeates our elites of ownership and management is inconsistent with the necessity of society congealing with common purpose.

Had it not been for the insurrection that began even before Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated, Abraham Lincoln might have resolved slavery as Britain did, using taxes and protecting industry through high tariffs to pay off the slave-holders. FDR may have saved the capitalist system in America by forcing the capitalists to make compromises with empowered labor -- the diametric opposite of what Hitler did in Germany in turning working people into serfs if not slaves as a reward to the plutocrats who backed him. President Obama, no angry populist but also no corporate stooge in a time of escalating anger toward tycoons and the executive elite, may be the only person to impose a just solution to labor-management relations.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 02-11-2012 at 02:00 PM.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#6992 at 02-11-2012 02:44 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
02-11-2012, 02:44 PM #6992
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Despite the fact that it began the same way as the last one and incorporates some unfinished issues, the course of this Crisis will not resemble 1929-1945. We know how to resolve the current economic impasse. We've done it before. What breaks new ground are the environmental, global-economic, and war/peace/empire issues that confront us this time. Those problems grew from the success of the institutions crafted at the end of the last Crisis, while the current recession/depression stem from its partial abandonment. If we resolve that immediate problem by restoring the New Deal as it should be, we will still face the other problems and even exacerbate them. So the fact that our current economic problems are mild compared to the Great Depression should not make us complacent.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#6993 at 02-11-2012 02:52 PM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
02-11-2012, 02:52 PM #6993
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

There are both good and not-so-good elements of the current economic situation. The good side(or maybe some NSG as well) is that working alone is more possible for people who are well-versed in the new technology and have loads of computer access and knowledge. The good part is that it can help us reduce energy consumption as a long commute five days a week will not be so necessary. Where the not-so-good side comes in is that it makes for a less cohesive society as the camaraderie is lost. But then again, some of the viciousness of office politics may negate much of that disadvantage. But we seem to be a society where peace and quiet is coveted yet often hard to come by.

The not-so-good side comes in where technology has made so many jobs obsolete which can be quite a burden on older folks who don't have the means to retire yet find that their ability to learn new skills has been reduced. With a larger cadre of such folks this can be a huge social problem which, IMO, has yet to be sufficiently addressed.







Post#6994 at 02-11-2012 03:18 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-11-2012, 03:18 PM #6994
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

The Right Freaks Out As GOP Poll Finds 20% Of Republicans May Vote For Obama

Looks like it's gonna be a Democratic landslide, LOL!

A major freak out is occurring on the right as a new poll released by a Republican polling company has found that 20% of Republicans are more likely to vote for Obama.

The poll done by Republican polling firm Wenzel Strategies for World Net Daily found something similar to my own recent analysis of state polling data that the 2012 election is beginning to look like a replay of 2008. The Wenzel/WND poll turned up the surprising statistic that no matter who the Republican nominee is, one fifth of the Republican voters surveyed are leaning towards voting for President Obama.

The only Republican candidate who doesnít lose at least 20% of GOP voters to Obama is Ron Paul, and he loses 19%. The poll found that 54% of those surveyed believed that Obama had exceeded or lived up to their expectations, and 47% said that he had not. Sixty percent of Independents thought Obama has met or exceeded their expectations as did 52% of moderates. In the head to head match ups with all voters polled Obama leads Romney, 48%-41%, Gingrich, 50%-36%, and Santorum, 49%-34%. Ron Paul fares best against Obama and he trails the president, 44%-40%.

Needless to say the right wing is freaking out over this poll. They realize that if 20% of Republicans defect from their party to support Obama, they will not win in 2012. Some on the right are claiming that the improving economy is helping Obama. Others are blaming the ugliness of the Republican primary for making all of the GOP alternatives unelectable. Most of their blame is being directed at Mitt Romney, as they use this poll to call for more conservative non-Romney candidate.

We also canít dismiss the wing nut theories that the 20% of Republicans are really Democrats who are being paid by George Soros, and that white guilt is motivating one fifth of Republicans to possibly support the president.

All of these theories range from the logical to the bizarre, but they all overlook something. The majority of the American people personally like Barack Obama, and the Republican candidates really suck. It isnít just the candidatesí fault though, the root of the problem rests with the positions of the Republican Party.

The GOP has taken unpopular positions on raising taxes on the wealthy, killing Medicare, creating jobs, birth control, and just about every other issue (minus the deficit) that matters to the American people.

The years of Republicans taking positions that show that they donít care about what the vast majority of Americans want has not only alienated Democrats and Independents, but also a portion of Republicans. Raising taxes on the wealthy is a popular position with a sizable percentage of Republicans. The GOP has ignored these members of their own party, while at the same trying to nominate a candidate who embodies the one percent. In contrast, Obama has taken the appealing position that taxes need to be raised on the wealthy. Raising taxes on the wealthy is the sort of issue that make some Republicans think twice about voting for Obama.

The truth is that the far right is freaking out because they donít understand how so many of their fellow Republicans could consider voting for a president that they can only see through their Marxist/Socialist delusions about him. The reality is that the imaginary Obama they see isnít the same as what the rest of America sees.

The right is melting down because they are realizing that not only that Obama may get reelected, but members of their own party may help him do it.

Yes, we can, indeed.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#6995 at 02-11-2012 05:01 PM by TnT [at joined Feb 2005 #posts 2,005]
---
02-11-2012, 05:01 PM #6995
Join Date
Feb 2005
Posts
2,005

Quote Originally Posted by Deb C View Post
And, the other thing I would do was to insist that pharmaceuticals develop a BCP for men. It's time they had to remember to take a pill everyday.
But there IS a BCP for men ... he puts in in his shoe and it makes him limp.
" ... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."







Post#6996 at 02-11-2012 05:39 PM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
02-11-2012, 05:39 PM #6996
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

But, unlike with FDR, it will be do or die in his second term because he is constitutionally ineligible to run for a third.







Post#6997 at 02-11-2012 05:56 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 05:56 PM #6997
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Agreed, and, well, we are. That was what was missing originally. Probably it's the norm. Millennials are the generation driving the Crisis, just as we drove the Awakening, and they were at that time younger and more naive than they are now.

Mind you, not as naive as WE were.
Yeah, we had the worldly knowledge of today's 10-years olds when we burst on the scene. I'm amazed how much havoc we created ... for good and ill.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#6998 at 02-11-2012 06:05 PM by Exile 67' [at joined Jan 2011 #posts 722]
---
02-11-2012, 06:05 PM #6998
Join Date
Jan 2011
Posts
722

Quote Originally Posted by playwrite View Post
Dude, you have no idea what I have and haven't done in my life.

However, I do like it when you all get to this point - even you can recognize how flaccid your arguments have become.
You turned your argument or position to free healthcare which is about the limpest position to take or argument to make with a person who clearly knows that he/she have worked to financially contribute or pay for everything in their lives up to this point.







Post#6999 at 02-11-2012 06:35 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-11-2012, 06:35 PM #6999
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Exile 67' View Post
You turned your argument or position to free healthcare which is about the limpest position to take or argument to make with a person who clearly knows that he/she have worked to financially contribute or pay for everything in their lives up to this point.
I haven't seen anyone argue for "free" healthcare, since it's not possible. PW and others, including me, have argued for single payer. I haven't seen anyone argue for socializing the healthcare industry, though it may accomplish something similar to that on its own. So I fail to see you point - especially given your concern that you may be expected to be a payer. If we actually get to single pater, then yes you will, just like the rest of us. If you're incorporated, so will your business. If you want to be pissed-off, there's your target.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#7000 at 02-11-2012 07:08 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-11-2012, 07:08 PM #7000
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Odin, I think I saw Coulter showing the effects of that poll at CPAC. She was warning the troops that Obama was still personally popular and that it was not going to be that easy to beat him. A Republican consultant said the same thing.
-----------------------------------------