The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

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:

 

[GILSAN]

Against facts there are no arguments and you've run out of arguments to defend Islam. Hail to All Non-Believers of the Religion of Peace around the world.

Yesterday's news show another barbarity in the name of the "Religion of Peace". when over 250 Syrian soldiers, captured from an air force base and held prisoner by ISIS Islamists, where rounded up and executed in the desert, to the delight of their captors.

Now I have a question. Isn't ISIS the same group that the Obama administration has been funding and arming for the past 2 years? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[verbster]

Against facts there are no arguments and you've run out of arguments to defend Islam. Hail to All Non-Believers of the Religion of Peace around the world.

Yesterday's news show another barbarity in the name of the "Religion of Peace". when over 250 Syrian soldiers, captured from an air force base and held prisoner by ISIS Islamists, where rounded up and executed in the desert, to the delight of their captors.

Now I have a question. Isn't ISIS the same group that the Obama administration has been funding and arming for the past 2 years? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I think they stole 400 Million in cash from a bank.

Your word is all the fact I need. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/13/us-fund-isis/

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/29/o...isis-militants-are-flush-with-funds.html?_r=0

 

[verbster]

Interesting interview with Paul Ryan on NPR this morning. Sais he was wrong about his "makers and takers" philosophy, and offered a plan to better distribute funds and care for the needy. Of course, this coincides with the release of his book, so it's hard not to be cynical, but even so, it was quite a big step in a different direction than normal party politics.

 

[GILSAN]

'We don't have a strategy yet': Obama stuns Washington by admitting he is clueless about tackling ISIS

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-network-losing-ground-Iraq-airstrikes.html

Lots of us have known all along that the "winner of the Nobel Peace Prize"

was clueless. Only the naive Liberal Loonies haven't figured it out yet

 

[GILSAN]

You can't deport me... I am gay: Jamaican thug's plea moments before being put on a plane stops him being kicked out of the UK

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-planes-stops-kicked-out.html#ixzz3BmVSv3OX

When you read stories like this about what's happening in the UK, but also in the EU, you don't know weather to laugh or cry.

I know exactly what I'd do with all our Politicians and the Law, but the words I have could not be published here.

 

[GILSAN]

The obsession that the majority of Liberal Americans have about classing everything as being "racist", can be solved by this "Common Sense" idea from Morgan Freeman

 

[verbster]

'We don't have a strategy yet': Obama stuns Washington by admitting he is clueless about tackling ISIS

Yeah. What the heck is wrong with this guy? How can he not have a rock solid plan for dealing with an organized group of terrorists in the Middle East? I'll bet the Republicans have several superb strategies they have made available. I'll bet most, if not all, of the European countries have excellent plans already in motion that should fix the ISIS problem by next week, as well as the Al-Qaeda troubles I'll bet everyone else already has a solution for the Russian incursion into Ukraine, Boko Haram kidnappings and massacres and a peace plan for Israel and Palestine. I just wish they would stop being so polite as to not offer them for fear of embarrassing Obama. Heck, even though he didn't use any of them, I'll bet Bush had good plans for dealing with terrorists before and after 9/11. I'm surprised he hasn't called Obama and shared with him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-network-losing-ground-Iraq-airstrikes.html

Lots of us have known all along that the "winner of the Nobel Peace Prize"

was clueless. Only the naive Liberal Loonies

haven't figured it out yet

I'm with you. The guy probably tries to use a driver out of a bunker. He's so stupid he fooled the Harvard Law Review into electing him president. And the completely clueless naïve liberals are so stupid they can't see that he's as stupid and clueless as they are. Liberals must have a stupidity gene.

We're in luck though. We've got tons of incredibly smart conservative Republicans with not much to do who are going to step up to the plate any minute now and unselfishly share their brilliant solutions to help the U.S.A. solve all of the messes caused by Obama's ineptitude. And if for some reason they are holding back, we can always get someone who is mega-smart and unbiased from the international pool of smart people. We might even get someone from the center of smartness, Madeira Island, to help out.

 

[GILSAN]

I'm with you. The guy probably tries to use a driver out of a bunker. He's so stupid he fooled the Harvard Law Review into electing him president. And the completely clueless naïve liberals are so stupid they can't see that he's as stupid and clueless as they are. Liberals must have a stupidity gene.

We're in luck though. We've got tons of incredibly smart conservative Republicans with not much to do who are going to step up to the plate any minute now and unselfishly share their brilliant solutions to help the U.S.A. solve all of the messes caused by Obama's ineptitude. And if for some reason they are holding back, we can always get someone who is mega-smart and unbiased from the international pool of smart people. We might even get someone from the center of smartness, Madeira Island, to help out.

Good to see you're beginning to see the light

 

[verbster]

Yup, can't believe I used to subscribe to some of those naïve liberal beliefs. Who needs stuff like clean air and water regulations? We can trust the owners of industry to regulate themselves. They'll do a far better job than the EPA when it comes to preserving a clean environment.

Man, it's a whole world of possibilities out there! If we didn't have regulations about food safety and sanitation, just think of how much money could be saved by recycling un-eaten table food. It would be an incentive to collect perfectly good food from plates, bag it up all together and donate it (for a tax write-off) to local soup kitchens or jails and prisons, where it could be prepared into flavorful, nutritious meals for very little money. Win/win.

 

[GILSAN]

Yup, can't believe I used to subscribe to some of those naïve liberal beliefs. Who needs stuff like clean air and water regulations? We can trust the owners of industry to regulate themselves. They'll do a far better job than the EPA when it comes to preserving a clean environment.

Man, it's a whole world of possibilities out there! If we didn't have regulations about food safety and sanitation, just think of how much money could be saved by recycling un-eaten table food. It would be an incentive to collect perfectly good food from plates, bag it up all together and donate it (for a tax write-off) to local soup kitchens or jails and prisons, where it could be prepared into flavorful, nutritious meals for very little money. Win/win.

So let me get this straight The U.S. consumes about 30 percent of the world's resources despite making up only 5 percent of the world's population. It also produces 30 percent of the world's waste, and you put the blame entirely on the conservatives?

Hmmm..... I suspect you either have a very high fever, or...

 

[verbster]

So let me get this straight The U.S. consumes about 30 percent of the world's resources despite making up only 5 percent of the world's population. It also produces 30 percent of the world's waste, and you put the blame entirely on the conservatives?

What are you talking about? I didn't blame conservatives for anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure I said we would be better off with fewer regulations promoted by Liberals. . . that without so many restrictive regulations, despite their intentions to protect the public, we can trust businesses to make sure the environment is taken care of . . . that conservatives recognize money isn't always the overriding goal . . . . that they care enough to protect our resources without being forced to. Today's republicans are nothing like they were pre- 2008. They are ready to work with liberals to respect the environment. They are here for the long term, not short term profit.

Did you have a problem with food recycling used to feed the needy and/or incarcerated people? They get good nutrition and businesses get a financial break not allowed now. I thought conservatives would like the idea.

 

[GILSAN]

What are you talking about? I didn't blame conservatives for anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure I said we would be better off with fewer regulations promoted by Liberals. . . that without so many restrictive regulations, despite their intentions to protect the public, we can trust businesses to make sure the environment is taken care of . . . that conservatives recognize money isn't always the overriding goal . . . . that they care enough to protect our resources without being forced to. Today's republicans are nothing like they were pre- 2008. They are ready to work with liberals to respect the environment. They are here for the long term, not short term profit.

Did you have a problem with food recycling used to feed the needy and/or incarcerated people? They get good nutrition and businesses get a financial break not allowed now. I thought conservatives would like the idea.

I have a problem with waste created by all kinds of big companies to supermarket chains and people who throw away tons of food every year.

Look at the packaging in supermarkets. Look how much you pay extra on a big box of food that is only 2/3 full. I remember seeing that for the first time when I was in the US. Found it revolting, but nobody seemed to give a damn at the time. Look at the gas guzzling American cars. They could easily consume 40-60% less fuel if the Car makers and Big Oil were forced to change.

Since Big Corporations have bought most Politicians a long time ago, this waste will continue for many more years. The puppet Politicians are only good at defending Big Corporations.

Big Pharma, now there's another good one. As an example here in Portugal, when I go to the doctor and he/she says I must take 2x XYZ pills per day for 7 days (total = 14 pills) Off I go to the Pharmacy which then sells me a packet of 20 or 25 pills. So that means that by the end of the week I have 6-11 XYZ pills that I probably won't use again, so therefore they will end in the trash can. Another waste

Too much waste in my opinion. The only solution is to throw all our politicians int0 a very large waste bin or land fill somewhere far away so we don't ever see them again, and replace them which trustworthy, incorruptible people with very big cojones, that will stand up in front of these Big Corporations and tell them in their face, they have to behave, or else.....

 

[Domainace]

Yup, can't believe I used to subscribe to some of those naïve liberal beliefs. Who needs stuff like clean air and water regulations?

Funny, I don't know a single conservative who is against clean air and water. Can you name a couple? I don't know any conservatives, or even libertarians, who are against reasonable regulations either. The problem is, whenever someone suggests reducing unreasonable regulations, people like you suggest that they want to eliminate all regulations on air and water. Seems that the left are unable/unwilling to see shades of gray. It's all black and white.

Did you have a problem with food recycling used to feed the needy and/or incarcerated people? They get good nutrition and businesses get a financial break not allowed now. I thought conservatives would like the idea.

What's wrong with the idea? Sounds OK to me, except I think it's economically unfeasible, and will end up actually causing more waste and expense in the long run - which makes it a perfect fit for liberals.

Amazing that in Japan, you can open a restaurant almost anytime and anywhere, with no hoops to jump through, no inspections, no licenses. If you have a fry pan and a location, you can just open up shop. And yet, food poisoning cases from poor hygiene are quite rare here. According to you, people should be getting poisoned left and right. Are US restaurant owners uniquely inclined to poison their customers? Is that why they need the endless regulation? Simply laws against poisoning people aren't sufficient? What a scary place to live the US must be.

 

[verbster]

Funny, I don't know a single conservative who is against clean air and water. Can you name a couple?

Gee, I don't know of a single conservative or liberal who wants a red hot poker in the eye, either. Nice diversion from the topic of clean water regulations to who likes clean water.

I don't know any conservatives, or even libertarians, who are against reasonable regulations either.

I do. 95 of them, in fact. The Republican co-sponsors of a 2012 bill to rewrite the clean Air Act that has worked for many years. But to be fair, the key to your claims is the word reasonable, which means so many different things to different people. For conservatives, it appears money, not the well being of people, is the reasonability quotient. For example, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., said of the Clean Air Act, "We will be active and aggressive using every tool in the toolbox to protect American jobs and our economy by rolling back the job-destroying (greenhouse gas) regulations." If you don't believe in climate change [which even Bush did by the end of his presidency], you may find Upton's statement reasonable. On the other hand, if you do believe there's even a chance there's something to greenhouse gases and global warming, removing the greenhouse gas regulations may seem unreasonable to people like me.

The problem is, whenever someone suggests reducing unreasonable regulations, people like you suggest that they want to eliminate all regulations on air and water.

People like me simply challenge what people like you assume is reasonable or unreasonable. There's no need to suggest anything else.

Seems that the left are unable/unwilling to see shades of gray. It's all black and white.

Can you not see that making such a black and white statement lumping all of the "left" together the way you want them to be, but not the way they are, proves your point about not seeing gray about yourself?

What's wrong with the idea? Sounds OK to me, except I think it's economically unfeasible, and will end up actually causing more waste and expense in the long run - which makes it a perfect fit for liberals.

Yeah, somehow I didn't think you'd find anything wrong with feeding table scraps to the needy.

Amazing that in Japan, you can open a restaurant almost anytime and anywhere, with no hoops to jump through, no inspections, no licenses. If you have a fry pan and a location, you can just open up shop. And yet, food poisoning cases from poor hygiene are quite rare here. According to you, people should be getting poisoned left and right. Are US restaurant owners uniquely inclined to poison their customers? Is that why they need the endless regulation? Simply laws against poisoning people aren't sufficient? What a scary place to live the US must be.

The stuff you make up is astounding, not only about "getting poisoned left and right," but also about requirements and rules for food establishments in Japan. Please tell me again how no permissions, permits, licenses, or inspections are needed, especially from the local prefectures. Have you read the Food Sanitation Law of Japan?

 

[RaiderGirl]

Gee, I don't know of a single conservative or liberal who wants a red hot poker in the eye, either.

In all honestly, don't liberals like Pelosi, Reed and many others use the "red hot poker in the eye" to intentional mislead the American People?, If a member of congress were to vote against cap and trade, Liberals would come out saying, "he's against clean air", when in reality what he's really against is voting for a substantial increase every Americans electric bill, Legislation that is based on a LIE that says C02 increase temperature.

 

[iowadawg]

Still an amusing thread to drop in once in a while.
Just to see one side pathetically try to advance the lies put out by the main stream media and the white house.

 

[verbster]

In all honestly, don't liberals like Pelosi, Reed and many others use the "red hot poker in the eye" to intentional mislead the American People?, If a member of congress were to vote against cap and trade, Liberals would come out saying, "he's against clean air", when in reality what he's really against is voting for a substantial increase every Americans electric bill, Legislation that is based on a LIE that says C02 increase temperature.

Sigh . . . as I just wrote, some people think global warming is not true, but others think it is. Just because you think it is a lie, doesn't mean it is.

 

[RaiderGirl]

Just to see one side pathetically try to advance the lies put out by the main stream media and the white house.

After 6 years of incompetence, mounting debt, the lowest labor force since 1978, (the jimmy carter days) not to mention our weakness around the world and growing tensions with Russia, you would think the main stream media and liberal supporters would have pulled their head out of their ass by now, where they say to themselves; "This guy really doesn't know what the hell he's doing" . It's time liberals stop making excuses and start being honest with themselves.

 

[RaiderGirl]

some people think global warming is not true, but others think it is.

Cap and Trade refers to Man Made Global Warming, NOT Global Warming itself... The latter is debatable, MMGW on the other hand is simply a fraud, it's been proven as such Scientifically and by physical evidence that exposed the fraud for what it is, why do you think the White House and Liberals no longer use the term?

 

[DU]

MMGW on the other hand is simply a fraud, it's been proven as such Scientifically and by physical evidence that exposed the fraud ?

The last evidence I recall you posted actually contradicted your views ... do we have updated resources to back up your claim now?

Credible scientific papers and journals would be appropriate. Any climate modeling with substantive reasonable margins for error would be good.