Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 19, 2009 at 16:36

GREAT IDEA!!

LET'S DO IT

Permalink Reply by Martin on March 25, 2009 at 9:12

For Jay Murrell, response to his post of march 17 --

A definition for fascism, copied from Wikipedia:
Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist ideology that aims to create a single-party state with a government led by a dictator who seeks national unity and development by requiring individuals to subordinate self-interest to the collective interest of the nation or race.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Fascist movements promote violence between nations, political factions, and races as part of a social Darwinist and militarist stance that views violence between these groups as a natural and positive part of evolution.[9] In the view of these groups being in perpetual conflict, fascists believe only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and have an aggressive warrior mentality by conquering, dominating, and eventually eliminating people deemed weak and degenerate.[10][11][12][13]
Fascist governments permanently forbid and suppress all criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement.[14] Fascist movements oppose any ideology or political system that gives direct political power to people as individuals through elected representatives rather than as a collective nation or race (individualism, liberalism, representative democracy); that is deemed detrimental to national identity and unity (communism, laissez-faire capitalism, non-nationalist and class conflict oriented labour movements); that protects and empowers people deemed weak and degenerate (egalitarianism) and that undermine the military strength and military ambitions of the nation (pacifism). They also oppose traditionalists and conservatives who may seek to preserve any of the privileges, institutions and cultural values that fascism seeks to overthrow.[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]

Please note that racism is not necessary for a facist government. That doesn't mean that it can not be exploited by it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 25, 2009 at 11:25

Facism sucks

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on March 18, 2009 at 8:40

Jimmy Carter, game over you lose Martin.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on March 18, 2009 at 11:07

Jim,
I've made no bones about the fact that GW's last two years in office were pretty crappy. It doesn't hurt my feelings or make me any less of a person for saying that, it doesn't hurt me to say Vitter was an idiot for putting earmarks in the last bill, see that's not too hard. The problem I have is liberals on here won't do the same. When confronted with the facts they either choose to ignore them or won't answer my post. Will some man or women please step-up to the plate and say " you know, they really screwed that up, they really need to fix that" instead of making these cornball excuses for their politicians and making themselves look silly, at some point liberals (or I keep thinking at some point) will step up and say "you know that's just not right no matter who you are" but they haven't done so yet, so I'll just keep waiting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Snake Stewart on March 18, 2009 at 12:41

Hey DCH,
Good to see you back at it. Looks like all your political friends on the other side of the fence missed ya too. LOL!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on March 18, 2009 at 14:39

Hello Snakester.
They miss me alright. I can feel the love just oozing out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by olddog573 on March 18, 2009 at 13:55

Blah, blah, blah! He didnt inherit the problem he asked for it, wait, let me change that, he begged for it saying he could fix it. To say we cant blame it on him is disregarding the fact that he was a senator and has had his hands in this as much as Bush.

I apologize if I am harsh but int he last 3 days I have driven 1100+ miles (and am still not finished) across the fruited plains in an effort to make life better for my family. It pains me to know that politicians want to tax me more so that they can hand it out to others that have not made, or want make, the sacrifices that I make. That isn't America.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by w.r. frank on March 18, 2009 at 14:35

Dear Old Dog,

Since you are driving 1,100 miles across the fruited plains "in an effort to make a better life for your family", may I ask, are you making over $250,000 per year? If not, your taxes will not go up! Might any of the stimulus $ (since you are not being taxed for them) benefit you as you make an effort for a better life--say construction funding, or college education, or job training, or grants to states for teachers, or police, or fire fighters?

If, in fact, you are making more than $250,000/year, why are you driving across the fruited plains "in an effort to make a better life for you family." Since the average household income is around $50,000, I would think you would survive OK at 5X that amount with ZERO increase in your taxes at wherever you are currently located without venturing into the "fruited plain, where you might encounter a non-Luddite and feel threatened.

PLEASE EXPLAIN?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd M. Baker on March 18, 2009 at 15:32

Mr. Frank:

What you don't understand is when you take more money from those making more than $250K, you aren't hurting them at all. They just don't hire the other people that they would if they could keep more of their money. Yes, trickle down does exist whether you want to believe it or not. The rich folks employee the rest of the folks. Do you make more money than your boss? If he has to pay more money to Uncle Sam and can't afford you, guess who gets laid off first?

The guy making the $250K will simply cut back on his spending in all areas and guess who gets hurt? Yep, those making less that provided the goods/services that he just stopped buying/using.

Please educate yourselves on the truth and realities of the situation. Class envy doesn't work and poor people have never done anything to help stimulate the economy.

TMB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by J. A. on March 18, 2009 at 15:38

Why were things good when Bill Clinton had the same tax policy and the economy thrived?
I'm a young republican business owner and really have no agenda behind my question. Is it because the congress was both republican and speaker newt got it right?>

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd M. Baker on March 18, 2009 at 16:09

Sorry Jim, we will have to disagree. Poor people, not diabled or such, are poor because of the choices they make each and every day. They chose not learn how to fish but want to be handed fish. This is most, not all.

And you are blind to the real meaning of trickle down. When I spend my money it benefits someone. It provided a job or source of income to someone down the ladder. Under your black helicopter scenario, there was no "value" added to any of the dollars spent. Yes, it was spent alright and someone down that ladder would benefit. But those neighborhoods would still be poor in the coming months because spending money does not make wealth.

As for opportunity, does the guy making minimum wage have opportunity?

TMB

TMB

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• …
• 15
• Next ›
• Page