Unstoppable Domains โ€” Expired Auctions
Spacemail by SpaceshipSpacemail by Spaceship
Watch

Who is to Blame for the Troubled US Economy?

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • Both Parties

    305 
    votes
    45.6%
  • Neither Party

    58 
    votes
    8.7%
  • Democrats

    150 
    votes
    22.4%
  • Republicans

    156 
    votes
    23.3%
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun :)

:wave:
 
17
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
AfternicAfternic
It's okay to puff away your life with weed, apparently, but gambling your own hard earned money not so much.

I thought the concern was the people gambling your hard earned money :)
 
0
•••
"It's the job of the night time people to take the daytime peoples' money."
--RWH
 
1
•••
1
•••
I'm beginning to think the biggest scam is the current Supreme court. I'm stunned that they've now eliminated the cap on political donations. It's truly going to be politicians being bought and paid for by corporations and billionaires. What a joke.
 
1
•••
I'm beginning to think the biggest scam is the current Supreme court. I'm stunned that they've now eliminated the cap on political donations. It's truly going to be politicians being bought and paid for by corporations and billionaires. What a joke.

Isn't that what's been happening for many years now with the majority of politicians being mere puppets of big banks, big corporations and billionaires?

By eliminating the Cap on political donations, they can now have ALL politicians become their puppets
 
1
•••
Isn't that what's been happening for many years now with the majority of politicians being mere puppets of big banks, big corporations and billionaires?

By eliminating the Cap on political donations, they can now have ALL politicians become their puppets

There was greed and graft, yes, but there was also the threat of being exposed, and many were (by the same press you belittle and appears to be also slowly being bought out).

My point here is that it's not the general public that benefits from this ruling. What good is one-person-one-vote when both candidates are paid not to care about people, the environment or basically anything except making money and garnering power.

And who thinks in terms of money first and all else is second? Well, the same five members of the Court who voted to legally categorize corporations as people were the same five judges that voted to eliminate campaign spending caps: Five Republicans voted yea; three Democrats and one Independent voted nay.

I always hope there will be public outrage, but we're such sheep we just bleat a little and hope someone else steps up to make noise for us. Ironically, that's what our elected politicians are supposed to do.
 
1
•••
There was greed and graft, yes, but there was also the threat of being exposed, and many were (by the same press you belittle and appears to be also slowly being bought out).
I belittle them because they are a big part of the problem. They are all owned by Big Corporations and they are the ones that have the strongest influence on people.
http://www.neatorama.com/2008/07/07/who-owns-what-on-television/#!CKqnW

My point here is that it's not the general public that benefits from this ruling. What good is one-person-one-vote when both candidates are paid not to care about people, the environment or basically anything except making money and garnering power.

And who thinks in terms of money first and all else is second? Well, the same five members of the Court who voted to legally categorize corporations as people were the same five judges that voted to eliminate campaign spending caps: Five Republicans voted yea; three Democrats and one Independent voted nay.

I always hope there will be public outrage, but we're such sheep we just bleat a little and hope someone else steps up to make noise for us. Ironically, that's what our elected politicians are supposed to do.

A genuine spontaneous revolution by the people is required to clip the wings of Big Banks for starters, followed by Big Corporations and then by politicians, who are doing the dirty work for their bosses

Spontaneous revolutions nowadays seem to start with young people and it doesn't look like American youngsters care much about politics, when compared to other countries. A very large % of them prefer smoking pot or other drugs and having a gooooood time.... that's what's important to them.
 
1
•••
I belittle them because they are a big part of the problem. They are all owned by Big Corporations and they are the ones that have the strongest influence on people.
http://www.neatorama.com/2008/07/07/who-owns-what-on-television/#!CKqnW

A genuine spontaneous revolution by the people is required to clip the wings of Big Banks for starters, followed by Big Corporations and then by politicians, who are doing the dirty work for their bosses

Spontaneous revolutions nowadays seem to start with young people and it doesn't look like American youngsters care much about politics, when compared to other countries. A very large % of them prefer smoking pot or other drugs and having a gooooood time.... that's what's important to them.

Last Friday, in the waiting room of an oral surgeon's office on the floor above mine, some guy pulled out his concealed 9mm and began cleaning it as though it was a normal thing to do in a dental office. The staff saw this, and having no idea what the guy might have in mind, called the other two waiting patients inside, called the police and evacuated everyone out the back door. In a few minutes, troopers in body armor, carrying M-16s were all over the place. One of them entered our office and politely asked us to lock our doors and remain inside until given the all clear sign. After reading this post, I'm waiting for the all clear sign.
 
1
•••
Last Friday, in the waiting room of an oral surgeon's office on the floor above mine, some guy pulled out his concealed 9mm and began cleaning it as though it was a normal thing to do in a dental office. The staff saw this, and having no idea what the guy might have in mind, called the other two waiting patients inside, called the police and evacuated everyone out the back door. In a few minutes, troopers in body armor, carrying M-16s were all over the place. One of them entered our office and politely asked us to lock our doors and remain inside until given the all clear sign. After reading this post, I'm waiting for the all clear sign.

Could you explain what you mean by: "After reading this post, I'm waiting for the all clear sign" :-/
 
1
•••
Could you explain what you mean by: "After reading this post, I'm waiting for the all clear sign" :-/

The goldfish flushed down the toilet no longer fear the house cat.
 
1
•••
I never understood why some people just -have- to do stuff like clean their gun at the doctors office, stupid and irresponsible imho.
 
1
•••
I never understood why some people just -have- to do stuff like clean their gun at the doctors office, stupid and irresponsible imho.

Until it happened, I'd never heard of anyone cleaning a gun in a dental office or any office before, so I'm not sure what you mean by people "have to do stuff" like that.

Of course it's ridiculous. Scared the bejesus out of people there. But he was not breaking any laws in Alaska. http://dps.alaska.gov/statewide/PermitsLicensing/inAK.aspx

They have signs up now, which means if you take a gun in, it's trespassing (woo-hoo).

All the folks who advocate less regulation should move to Alaska for a while; then you can decide for yourself how you would feel when you're in a waiting room of some kind and some guy pulls out a gun and starts playing around with it. If your pulse doesn't jump up a little, you're not human.

Speaking of deregulation, my original post was supposed to point out the idiocy of the Supreme Court and their decisions basically deregulating campaign contributions by corporations and now equating free speech with how much money you have. The more money you can spend on a candidate, the more your views are represented. Voting will no longer matter if all candidates represent the ideology of their major donors. Someone said it was like "eBay" for elections."

The scary thing though (to me) is the trend to give more rights to corporations than to individuals, rights which supersede those of citizens, which brings up the next decision: The Hobby Lobby case will determine if corporations are entitled to impose their religious/moral beliefs on their employees, beginning with denying employees certain health care benefits, like birth control. This is truly scary stuff on a global scale, like seeing a guy pull out a gun in a waiting room, only in this case, the guy is the Supreme court.
 
1
•••
Until it happened, I'd never heard of anyone cleaning a gun in a dental office or any office before, so I'm not sure what you mean by people "have to do stuff" like that.
I was trying to be funny :p
But really , I mean I am ok with gun rights, carry laws for the most part, but I dont see the point in walking around with rifles in hand just to get an argument with the cops or just becuase you -have- to clean your gun in the doctors office while waiting, he could have just gone to the restroom to "clean up" a little and nothing would have happened even if it is technicaly not agaisnt the law it doesnt mean you have to do it.

corporations would have a lot of trouble without the goverment supporting them
 
1
•••
My point was that based on the recent history of indiscriminate shootings and terrorism attacks, that anyone would even think it was okay to clean a gun in a public building or office has a ground wire loose, and it's even worse if no thought went into his actions. To be unaware of how his actions would alarm others, is scary in its own right.

Once again though, this is secondary to the vote to allow unlimited corporate funds to be contributed to politicians.

Ah, I'm tired of this. Time to go see Ray Wylie Hubbard sing some songs.
 
1
•••
Once again though, this is secondary to the vote to allow unlimited corporate funds to be contributed to politicians.

Yea I know that it is secondary. I dont think it is a good decsion by the court but really, what did you expect? Maybe it is even better now. Everything is more out in the open, no longer do corporate funds have to be hidden and washed but rather can go directly to the campagin, as if they dont already.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
rights which supersede those of citizens, which brings up the next decision: The Hobby Lobby case will determine if corporations are entitled to impose their religious/moral beliefs on their employees, beginning with denying employees certain health care benefits, like birth control.

A corporation's goal is to make money. If they offer fewer benefits to their employees, the quality employees find employment elsewhere, the company becomes less competitive in the marketplace and over time loses market share. It is also a citizen's right to remind people that that particular company has what they feel to be a marginal employee compensation/health plan.

A company has the right to make bad employment policy decisions.

This has less to do with religious freedom than it does to do with whether or not the government can oversee every business decision you want to make in your corporation.

If the government can FORCE you to include birth control in your business's employee policy, then a more conservative government in the future can FORCE you to remove birth control from every employee policy from every business in the future.

Similarly, this is why it is a terrible idea for groups to try and place christian emblems on court house lawns; at some point in the future, they would then have to be accepting of pagan, religions placing their emblems on the lawn.

All of this is irrelevant anyway, the whole point of nationalizing health care was to make it so expensive that companies could no longer afford to offer health care plans, thereby forcing every citizen onto an expensive, highly inefficient entitlement program disguised as health care.

Health care costs in my company have risen 59% in three years. That is a fact, and it is a direct result of Obamacare. The insurance company has warned us that in the fall we will need to be ready for an additional significant increase in next year's policy. That is another fact. And, no, you cannot blame that on Bush.

But, you keep on with your crusade to make 80 year olds pay for birth control benefits, if that makes you happy.
 
1
•••
1
•••
1
•••
A corporation's goal is to make money. If they offer fewer benefits to their employees, the quality employees find employment elsewhere, the company becomes less competitive in the marketplace and over time loses market share. It is also a citizen's right to remind people that that particular company has what they feel to be a marginal employee compensation/health plan.
Your free market thinking doesn't cover all the international outsourcing. Or do you think itโ€™s okay to make money at the expense of the employees and the effect it may have on others outside of the corporation, like Nikeโ€™s child labor in Asia and Mobilโ€™s oil spills. The desire to make money shouldnโ€™t give a corporation the right to make decisions that affect the quality of my life or yours.

BTW, 200 years ago, corporations were severely regulated. There were laws making โ€œany political contribution by corporations a criminal offense.โ€ In 1816, Thomas Jefferson said, โ€œI hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.โ€ Instead, we reward their billions in profits with billions in subsidies and tax breaks that citizens donโ€™t get.
A company has the right to make bad employment policy decisions. .
Yeah, you have the right to punch yourself in the nose, too. But you donโ€™t have the right to punch yourself and fall on my child and break her arm.
This has less to do with religious freedom than it does to do with whether or not the government can oversee every business decision you want to make in your corporation. .
To the contrary, it has everything to do with a for-profit corporation trying to hide behind โ€œreligious freedomโ€ to force their personal morality upon employees, which is more akin to a corporation making every decision for employees than the government making every decision for a corporation.
If the government can FORCE you to include birth control in your business's employee policy, then a more conservative government in the future can FORCE you to remove birth control from every employee policy from every business in the future. .
Not if there is law made by the Supreme Court, which is, once again, the main point: What the Supreme Court is deciding is at the heart of the matter. They are taking it upon themselves to ascribe the right of religious beliefs to the rich as being more important than the liberties of citizens and/or employees. Why should the religious beliefs of the corporate officers take precedent over the religious beliefs of the workers?
Similarly, this is why it is a terrible idea for groups to try and place christian emblems on court house lawns; at some point in the future, they would then have to be accepting of pagan, religions placing their emblems on the lawn. .
Too late: The Christmas Tree is a pagan symbol.
All of this is irrelevant anyway, the whole point of nationalizing health care was to make it so expensive that companies could no longer afford to offer health care plans, thereby forcing every citizen onto an expensive, highly inefficient entitlement program disguised as health care. .
Good grief. Another nonsensical conspiracy theory. Iโ€™ll bet when youโ€™re 80, and the Conservatives have done away with social security and Medicaid, youโ€™ll be happy you have that inefficient health care entitlement program.
Health care costs in my company have risen 59% in three years. That is a fact, and it is a direct result of Obamacare. The insurance company has warned us that in the fall we will need to be ready for an additional significant increase in next year's policy. That is another fact. And, no, you cannot blame that on Bush. .
Your increasing premiums might be a fact, but your reasons why are not.
Aetna insurance says, โ€œAccording to National Health Expenditure data, the growth in premiums tracked directly with the underlying cost of medical care from 2000-2010 โ€” a trend that has been consistent for decades.โ€
If your companyโ€™s premiums have risen 59% in three years, it sounds like your company has exercised its right to make bad decisions. Blaming Obama for your 59% is as absurd as blaming Bush.
But, you keep on with your crusade to make 80 year olds pay for birth control benefits, if that makes you happy.
Yeah, thatโ€™s what I do every day, crusade to make old people pay for birth control.
 
1
•••
Last edited:
1
•••
Appraise.net
Escrow.com
Spaceship
Rexus Domain
CryptoExchange.com
Domain Recover
CatchDoms
DomainEasy โ€” Zero Commission
DomDB
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back