Sanders vs the GOP
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
So, you repubs prefer spending on pointless never ending war in the middle east and weapons systems the pentagon doesn't even want and cutting taxes driving up the debt to paying a lower cost for 2 years of junior college eduction and leaving taxes the same or increasing a little on the highest earners?
Seems reasonable....
Seems reasonable....
Well, you're delusional. You and your buddy Obama ignoring that Russia is kicking our ass....China too....ISIS.....Mexicans....invading our border.......taking in Syrian refugees.....
getting us into larger and larger messes......but you hatred for Republicans blinds you....you're not leading.......you're going to end up immersing us in a huge war.
Yeah... thanks for the warning. Roll one of your name and chill out.Well, you're delusional. You and your buddy Obama ignoring that Russia is kicking our ass....China too....ISIS.....Mexicans....invading our border.......taking in Syrian refugees.....
getting us into larger and larger messes......but you hatred for Republicans blinds you....you're not leading.......you're going to end up immersing us in a huge war.
So, you repubs prefer spending on pointless never ending war in the middle east and weapons systems the pentagon doesn't even want and cutting taxes driving up the debt to paying a lower cost for 2 years of junior college eduction and leaving taxes the same or increasing a little on the highest earners?
Seems reasonable....
Has anybody (aside from WWJD) suggested such ideas?
Nobody wants a war in the Middle East. However, you can't suggest we simply let these areas go into a wasteland like Afghanistan once did, because we all know how that ended?
The best policy would be to say "hey world, we're out of it from now on, but if you start anything with us we will end you."
And then bring home all of the troops - let them patrol the border. Give them pay raises. Invest in education for those who need it. Yes, I'm all for that. But don't raise taxes - instead spend smarter.
I think other posters have touched on this, but you have a tragically distorted sense of history. American Indians by and large were a proud and productive people who's entire population has been subjugated and destroyed primarily by alcoholic beverages. I spent 18 months in Alaska while I was in the military and dealt extensively with native Alaskans. Their susceptibility to alcoholism was amazing. There was absolutely no such thing as a moderate drinker. If they drank alcohol at all, they seemed to be a raging alcoholic.
Your choice of singling out American Indians as a socialistic failure is interesting in that the terms for their failure were set up by American Capitalism. It was capitalists who doomed them to reservation life, it was capitalists who exposed them to alcohol, and it is capitalists who now seek to deny them a chance to leave the reservation by taking away the scant opportunities they have. For the past 100 years, where has capitalism been to rescue the native American?
Ya right......you are smarter than that. I would bet if you asked people where the money comes from they get they won't be able to tell you.
No the cons would rather people be personally responsible and pay their own way.
I would ask some of these youngsters if they are willing to give up 60 percent of their income after they have a job so they can have a "free education".
So, you repubs prefer spending on pointless never ending war in the middle east and weapons systems the pentagon doesn't even want and cutting taxes driving up the debt to paying a lower cost for 2 years of junior college eduction and leaving taxes the same or increasing a little on the highest earners?
Seems reasonable....
You don't seem to understand that with Sanders you will get all the above. War in the middle east, weapons systems we don't need and increased taxes to pay for the "free" two years of college that only those who don't pay taxes will receive......
I think the only way Biden gets in is if one of two happens:
1. Hillary gets pulled from the race (due to email usage issues).
2. Warren agrees to run as his VP.
Biden isn't going pull many Bernie votes away but he will pull lots of Hillary's. If that happens Bernie walks to the nomination and Biden knows it. If Hills is allowed to stay he needs to be able to clip at least 15% of Bernie's votes and he knows he needs Warren to do it.
The question becomes what will Warren do...Will she run over both Hillary and Sanders (two people I think she respects) to get the #2 chair?
Can you get ANYTHING right?
[1] You engage in the con misdirection popularized by Fox: you IMAGINE what you would find if you actually checked, and then you assume it's true. Really?
[2] Cons would rather build their own individual roads, be their own doctors, be their own cops? Really?
[3] People would have to pay 60% of their income to pay for "free education"? Really?
Please go back to the children's board. You aren't ready for adult discussions.
So, you repubs prefer spending on pointless never ending war in the middle east and weapons systems the pentagon doesn't even want and cutting taxes driving up the debt to paying a lower cost for 2 years of junior college eduction and leaving taxes the same or increasing a little on the highest earners?
Seems reasonable....
WTF are you talking about? Do you even know?
When they run out of other people's money then what? Socialism just doesn't work. This guy should make anyone with half a brain shudder. Socialism is a pillar of the democratic party platform. The only good thing about him is at least he admits he is one. He would be horrible for the country.
Yes, because 2 free years of college education would be bad, but a middle east war would be good, right?
Google is a wonderful thing. Google Bernie sanders and 90 % tax rate. He has not proposed it but does not think it would be too high.
"He has not proposed it but..."
If "If's and buts were candy and nuts every day would be Christmas".
There is pretty much no one here facing a tax increase because of Sanders. If there is, good for them, they lead a nice standard of living and that wouldn't change.
If "If's and buts were candy and nuts every day would be Christmas".
There is pretty much no one here facing a tax increase because of Sanders. If there is, good for them, they lead a nice standard of living and that wouldn't change.
So you tell me that people who get assistance know where it comes from. Prove it, you made the claim not me.
Your comprehension is not good so I would suggest you stay on the kiddie board. I never said anything about roads, doctors or cops. First of all I do pay for my own doctor, I have health insurance with a high deductible but you spend enough time on this board with your dumb polls that I am sure my tax money is paying for your doctor.
Where the hell do you think the money is going to come from for education. Don't be a moron. If the government did everything you wanted it to our tax rates would sky rocket. Where the heck do you think the money comes from. And you are the one who has said we should go back to 90 percent. Really?? 90 percent is going to cover everything you want the government to do?? Most likely not.
Use your common sense for a change and get rid of the personal insults when someone questions you.
Which is odd why so many on here fight the riches battles for them. Virtually none of us stand the chance of being in the top 1%. In fact there's a 99% chance you won't being there. So why would any of us fight tooth and nail for tax cuts that we will never see?
It's a tradeoff, and I speak from experience. In those countries, most people live a middle class lifestyle, and very few people have hope of ever owning a home. Public transport is great, but owning a car and traveling on your own schedule is not on many people's radar, or one car to share, not one for you and the Mrs. Kids don't wish to own a car when they're 16, but they can drink when they're 17 or 18. Their homes are sufficient for living, but the comfort of a 3 bedroom two bathroom, 1,800 square foot house with a yard is well beyond the means of most people. Instead a comfortable 1-3 bedroom, 600-1000 square foot apartment shared with neighbors you don't know is much more the norm. Free healthcare (for all, better private healthcare for the wealthy), government subsidized college, mandatory military service, are standard.
When I lived in Europe, there were lots of positives, but I was ready to come home to a (relatively) spacious house with a yard, my own comfortable, American sized car, a decent hamburger, and a grill I was free to use whenever I wanted, and free refills in restaurants. I even took the opportunity to drink Dr. Pepper, Root Beer, eat good mexican food, and make some nachos with cheese that melts correctly, virtual impossibilities in those countries.
I have always thought Warren was a good choice for VP (depending on who wins the top spot) and very likely to accept that role.
While I love that Bernie is doing well, I still don't expect him to get the nomination. You may be right that if Biden gets in while Hillary is also still in that could actually help Bernie. But I'm not convinced that Biden will get in unless Hillary stumbles badly.
I still think a Hillary-Warren ticket would do well. Unless this email nonsense kills her. Warren will keep most Bernie fans from being too disappointed. And, unlike some, I think 2 women on the ticket could be a positive, not a negative. Those who would be turned off by it aren't likely to vote D anyway. But it could energize young and women voters, and hold onto voters who might otherwise go Green.
All 3 of those countries have higher home ownership rates than the US. Norway and Finland much higher.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
So, basically, you got tired of Europe because you liked the menu better here??? Oh, and your car and house was a little bit more "spacious?"
By the way, you never "own a home" here either... ever! You never "own" a vehicle either. Even if you pay for it in cash, in full; Then you pay property taxes on it every year or lose it. You never own it free and clear.
Then I was hanging with the wrong crowd. I find it very difficult to believe, but wikipedia has spoken.
I know what you said/wrote. I have no way of knowing what you meant, unless you write it.
Your understanding of the phrase "home ownership" does not align with 99.999% of all educated adult Americans. However, out of the box thinkers like you are responsible for most of the progress the world has made in the last 500 years. You are no doubt destined for greatness.
Fantastic - so we get to have really well educated kids sit around in prison camps as ISIS runs our country!
Please point out where those other candidates "want to send" the kids to war. I bet you are generalizing based on your scale tilting to the Left.
How are the states going to "make up" the money to pay for those free degrees?
what does the POTUS do when Iran builds a nuke, regardless of any deal?
My guess is nothing. A lot of countries have the nuke. Israel has the nuke. I will say this, though, starting a war with a country that has the nuke is probably not the wisest of ideas.
We never truly own anything. We use it for a while. Then, if it's still here when we die, someone else gets to use it. If anything, the thing we try to own is the only true owner of itself!
But, in the sense of ownership that you're referring to, you have to keep buying it in order to own it! It's important to make that distinction, don't you think? I don't think I'd acknowledge that as actual ownership. In fact, this is where the dichotomy of People and The State comes into plain view. Or, at least the true power structure as a result of it. That which truly owns is that which truly has the power in our material world. But, hey, the menu is better here. I mean, really, wherever the cheese melts best is all that really matters.
That is precisely why those in power here do NOT want Iran to have a nuke. They aren't worried about Iran using it! They simply don't want to lose the option of invasion, war and occupation. When a country gets a nuke, they're off-limits. It's that simple. It's like a Super Power Club Card. The members never destroy each other, because the whole club is more valuable than any member.
Which would be the #1 reason for Iran (and other nations) to want nukes. Can you blame them?
Bush labeled Iraq, Iran and N.Korea the "Axis of Evil." Look what's happened to the ones without nukes. No, we haven't invaded Iran yet, but we routinely threaten to bomb them.
I find it funny - funny disturbing, not funny ha-ha - that Americans can, with a straight face point to some Iranian leaders saying they will attack Israel as proof that Iran must be bombed back to the stone age. Yet we see American leaders routinely threaten to bomb Iran and somehow think this should not be taken as proof of our nefarious intentions or untrusworthiness.
A Clinton/Warren ticket would be nigh on impossible for any currently plausible GOP candidate to beat.
I used to think Obama never had a chance because of his name, not his skin color. American white males have now endeared themselves to many black males, especially through the worship of organized sports in this country, that his appearance wasn't that threatening. But, that name, especially Hussein as a middle name, always made me think there was no way that enough Americans would go for it. Americans never seek substance. Our society is proof. I learned I was wrong about that assumption. I'm glad I was. it means our shallow society isn't as shallow as I thought. I don't want to make the same mistake about a 2-female ticket!
The bellicose rhetoric of these people is no reason to start a war. States act in self interest. Starting a large war is not in Iran's interest.
