Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Republicans - Obama is a muslim terrorist who wants to destroy America! Democrats want to turn this country into a socialist nation run by homosexuals!
Democrats - Republican teabaggers are anarchists who want to take us back to the days of slavery and put gays in concentration camps!
The most amusing part of this liberal circle jerk is the focus on ignorant Republicans, as if the majority of Democrat voters are well informed geniuses. But of course this thread is filled with people who absolutely love the two party system and furthering the divisiveness that comes with it...
I wonder what your average inner city Democrat voter would know about economics? I'm sure they could eloquently explain the advantages of Keynesian economics vs Austrian economics while sipping a glass of red wine!
Inner city dweller, self-employed, votes Democratic because the Repugs have an anti-minority-poor & stable society platform.
Oops sorry, I must know nothing about economics except I live in the city that is literally economy and resource in constant action. Circle jerking myself all the way to the bank that is robbing me and families across the nation. Seeing it close up and walking and WORKING amongst these "economy" savvy Republicans and business owners wouldn't give us any experience with that.
And I don't discriminate -- Red Wine or a local beer would do me just right -- or should I buy me some big ol' American type beer owned by a multi-national? Then wonder to myself why did this multi-national just pay lower taxes then that local brewer.. hmm...
Ignorance doesn't know class or race or ethnicity or political affiliation. It is more than abundant in America right now, across the board. I think the difference is that the right is proud of their ignorance. It's like a badge of honor.
That's weird, because the majority of ignorant Democrats I've spoken with are loud, obnoxious and will literally threaten physical violence for disagreeing with them. Stereotypes sure are fun!
Danbird did the literal opposite of a sterotype, are you referring to my and LD's exchange? Because that's not a stereotype either, that's sharing personal experiences.
And being 'ignorant' has nothing to do with being able to understand (or recite on command) the definition and meaning behind different economic theories.
Ignorance is looking at a television or a newspaper, seeing/hearing something and then going to spread it throughout the world like a little bumblebee without checking if your source is honest, has a history of being biased, has affiliations with a certain politician or political party, etc.
Ignorance isn't just a conservative problem, there are plenty of people who are voting for Obama because they like him more than Mitt and that has nothing to do with policy.
Have you read this thread, at all?
LD despises both parties. I've said multiple times I'm not a fan. People have posted about the biased media coverage given to the two parties and none of the other, smaller political parties.
Talk about stereotypes, you think because we're on a Bonnaroo fan site that we're all steaming piles of liberal hippie? Not quite.
The fact is (yes, the fact) that more people watch FoxNews religiously than CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the news networks combined. They have a larger following and their demographics lend to be lower-income, and older people. Essentially, they doom and gloom poor and old people into fear-fueled panics and use that to sway public opinion.
Do other networks do this as well? Absolutely. But nowhere near the consistency of FoxNews, and nowhere near the outright falsifying of information that FoxNews specializes in.
No one said that "liberals" are informed and "conservatives" are uninformed. I am of the firm stance that the vast majority (both sides) are uninformed and just take their marching orders from one side or the other.
But yeah, just paint this thread with broad strokes and be a d*ck to people trying to have constructive politically and economically-driven discussions.
The most amusing part of this liberal circle jerk is the focus on ignorant Republicans, as if the majority of Democrat voters are well informed geniuses. But of course this thread is filled with people who absolutely love the two party system and furthering the divisiveness that comes with it...
I wonder what your average inner city Democrat voter would know about economics? I'm sure they could eloquently explain the advantages of Keynesian economics vs Austrian economics while sipping a glass of red wine!
Inner city dweller, self-employed, votes Democratic because the Repugs have an anti-minority-poor & stable society platform.
Oops sorry, I must know nothing about economics except I live in the city that is literally economy and resource in constant action. Circle jerking myself all the way to the bank that is robbing me and families across the nation. Seeing it close up and walking and WORKING amongst these "economy" savvy Republicans and business owners wouldn't give us any experience with that.
And I don't discriminate -- Red Wine or a local beer would do me just right -- or should I buy me some big ol' American type beer owned by a multi-national? Then wonder to myself why did this multi-national just pay lower taxes then that local brewer.. hmm...
Sorry dude, living in the hipster part of Brooklyn doesn't make you an 'inner city dweller' - you know what I mean
Inner city dweller, self-employed, votes Democratic because the Repugs have an anti-minority-poor & stable society platform.
Oops sorry, I must know nothing about economics except I live in the city that is literally economy and resource in constant action. Circle jerking myself all the way to the bank that is robbing me and families across the nation. Seeing it close up and walking and WORKING amongst these "economy" savvy Republicans and business owners wouldn't give us any experience with that.
And I don't discriminate -- Red Wine or a local beer would do me just right -- or should I buy me some big ol' American type beer owned by a multi-national? Then wonder to myself why did this multi-national just pay lower taxes then that local brewer.. hmm...
Sorry dude, living in the hipster part of Brooklyn doesn't make you an 'inner city dweller' - you know what I mean
For christ sakes, stop being a presumptive dickwad
Fitting that on a day where my criticism of Fox News is called into question it posts an article referring to Michael Jordan as "FAILED BASEBALL PLAYER Michael Jordan." And they also called Carmelo Anthony an "anti-police activist."
Fitting that on a day where my criticism of Fox News is called into question it posts an article referring to Michael Jordan as "FAILED BASEBALL PLAYER Michael Jordan." And they also called Carmelo Anthony an "anti-police activist."
Nice journalistic integrity there, FN.
I know they weren't necessarily being racist there....but I just saw that image on another site and it made me chuckle.
Complain about it all you want, but this bit of rhetoric is grounded in reality.
"I'm not in favor of abolishing the government. I just want to shrink it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." - Grover Norquist, founder & president of Americans for Tax Reform.
I'm sorry, but what he describes here, murdering the government... if that's not anarchy, then what is? Grover Norquist is nothing more than an anarchist in a tie.
Norquist has a pledge. Oppose any and all tax increases - including eliminating useless tax credits/cuts or closing loopholes - or you're on his bad side. The consequences of this, in a world of unlimited/anonymous/dark money flowing into campaigns, is getting a heavily-funded primary opponent in a world where the paradigm is "Getting re-elected is Goal #1." I think that this constitutes a pledge of ideological rigidity which, as a pragmatist, I feel runs contrary to their oath of office. You can't properly represent your constituents when your answer to a question of "Which shade of Grey?" is shouting "Black!" or "White!" exclusively.
Now... 238/242 Republicans in the House and 41/47 Republicans in the Senate have signed this pledge of fealty to an anarchist in a tie. That's a solid majority in the House and enough to overcome any filibuster in the Senate.
This isn't just some bit of overheated rhetoric along with the rest, as you imply. It is, sadly, the state of things in Washington these days.
The truth is that the Ryan budget’s largest long-term savings don’t come from Medicaid or Medicare or Social Security, or even Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security put together. They come from everything else. Ryan says that under his budget, everything the federal government does that is not Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security will be cut to less than 3.75 percent of GDP by 2050. That means defense, infrastructure, education, food safety, energy research, national parks, civil service, the FBI — all of it. Right now, that category of spending is 12.5 percent of GDP.
Critics point out that defense alone has always cost more than 3 percent of GDP, that Romney has promised to keep defense spending above 4 percent of GDP, and that the cuts to government services required to make those numbers work are beyond draconian. They also note that Ryan’s plan increases defense spending in the short term, and that his tax cuts have a 10-year price tag of more than $4 trillion, but he’s not identified any offsets.
That's by no means anarchy, but it certainly is the very definition of extreme.
His plan is moderate. It doesn't do nearly enough. It should be slashing the "defense" budget by extreme amounts as well then it would be on the way to being at least a token effort.
That's by no means anarchy, but it certainly is the very definition of extreme.
His plan is moderate. It doesn't do nearly enough. It should be slashing the "defense" budget by extreme amounts as well then it would be on the way to being at least a token effort.
What planet do you live on that states a nearly 10% of GDP drop in gov't spending is "moderate"?
The truth is that the Ryan budget’s largest long-term savings don’t come from Medicaid or Medicare or Social Security, or even Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security put together. They come from everything else. Ryan says that under his budget, everything the federal government does that is not Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security will be cut to less than 3.75 percent of GDP by 2050. That means defense, infrastructure, education, food safety, energy research, national parks, civil service, the FBI — all of it. Right now, that category of spending is 12.5 percent of GDP.
Critics point out that defense alone has always cost more than 3 percent of GDP, that Romney has promised to keep defense spending above 4 percent of GDP, and that the cuts to government services required to make those numbers work are beyond draconian. They also note that Ryan’s plan increases defense spending in the short term, and that his tax cuts have a 10-year price tag of more than $4 trillion, but he’s not identified any offsets.
That's by no means anarchy, but it certainly is the very definition of extreme.
The fact is he's trying to fudge things to make it seem we can be have budget surpluses in the future. The only way (outside of more severe cuts to med/ss/etc) to do this is to severely cut discretionary items. The fact is, left untouched, current programs such as medicare/aid and others will leave the federal gov't with zero money to spend on other things, which simply means massive deficits. I agree with many other pragmatist commentators, at some point we have to accept that government will cost more and we will receive less in return for an extended period of time. There will be too few workers and too many elderly people dependent on them. I applaud both sides for sticking to their principles, but facts must be faced.
Bonnaroo 2008-2013
0ct 11 Pearl Jam
Oct 12 Pearl Jam
March 16 Arcade Fire
April 29 Arcade Fire
Sept 4 Wilco
Sept 9 The Hold Steady
Oct 16 Pearl Jam
Oct 17 Gaslight Anthem
The fact is, left untouched, current programs such as medicare/aid and others will leave the federal gov't with zero money to spend on other things, which simply means massive deficits. I agree with many other pragmatist commentators, at some point we have to accept that government will cost more and we will receive less in return for an extended period of time.
I really encourage you to do primary source research on this. There is a huge chasm between not leaving things untouched, which we shouldn't do, and Ryan style 3% GDP caps, which would be far worse. Viewed on a 100 year time line, the SSA/Med programs require attention but not panic. And people should really start addressing their discomfort with deficits. This is a government, not a business. We borrow at zero % right now.
Unfortunately, while it is easy to look at such a long timeline and think we can address these things later, the longer we wait, the worst the situation becomes and the more drastic the solution will become. Yes interest rates are quite low, but they won't be forever and we should get our budget on course for long-term reality.
...All this while ignoring the underlying issue of our national economy: We still allow derivatives, and massive real estate and financial speculation -- while also spending trillions on military contractors when we should be either fostering a true national defense w/o lobbyists. Ya. Inconvenient -- but you wouldn't need to cut those programs if you actually believed there would be a stable economy, or tax code, or let's say close massive tax loopholes and tax havens. Stop defunding and clarify our regulations first, we are talking about legislation that is fundamentally going to shape our future. And economically how does it make sense to cut lower income necessities when we keep giving tax cuts to everyone else? It's slash and burn and sooner or later we have to breath and stop having twitch reactions to all these interest groups. All of them.
Last Edit: Aug 29, 2012 23:10:37 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Even someone on Fox News couldn't help but call him out on his BS.
And with each day that passes, more and more Ryan for Congress signs (from 2010) pop up in my neighborhood next to the Romney signs. At least I'll be out of the f*cking suburbs soon.
Also, I'm just salivating for when the debates start.