2016 Election
Quote: EvenBobWalker and Trump and Carly are the
only ones I would vote for. Walker's
problem is, he has the experience yet
comes off like a wimp. Like he's
beholden to so many big donors
he doesn't dare open his mouth.
Hopefully he is playing the game of keep quiet until things matter. I really haven't seen him much what with being a cord cutter and watching little live TV. Carly, seriously, the broad is afraid of nobody. Could be our Margaret Thatcher. She comes off that tough.
Quote: AZDuffmanName even one social program where a legit cost/benefit discussion has been made.
Earned Income Credit
(if you want more than one: education, paved roads and medicine. . . )
Wikipedia says federal government spend $700 billion in social programs, most everyone agrees there is quite a bit of waste in there. But we get back at least some of it as it includes tangible things like food, housing, electricity, and cash to Americans.
In 2010 we spent $400 billion on the Recovery and Restoration Act and got back very little. In 2008 we spent another $400 billion on bank bailouts and got back almost nothing. How much have we spent fighting wars this century? How much have we gotten back from all that spending?
Quote: TomGEarned Income Credit
(if you want more than one: education, paved roads and medicine. . . )
Wikipedia says federal government spend $700 billion in social programs, most everyone agrees there is quite a bit of waste in there. But we get back at least some of it as it includes tangible things like food, housing, electricity, and cash to Americans.
Getting SOME of it back is not a good cost/benefit. Getting most or more is.
Quote:How much have we spent fighting wars this century? How much have we gotten back from all that spending?
Quite a bit back from fighting wars. WWI/WWII if not for them we would not have any access to Europe and we would be reduced to just the western hemisphere. The technology leap from WWII was amazing. In the Gulf War we kept access to oil. Wars, unlike social spending, are a legit and constitutional function of government.
Quote: AZDuffmanGetting SOME of it back is not a good cost/benefit. Getting most or more is.
What does that about government spending where we get back NONE of it?
Quote: AZDuffman
Wars, unlike social spending, are a legit and constitutional function of government.Quote:How much have we spent fighting wars this century? How much have we gotten back from all that spending?
The examples you give were all from last century. WWI, WWII, DS/DS were legit. Others haven't been
Quote: EvenBobI thought it was brilliant of Trump to just avoid
the whole thing. It was a gotcha question and
they all knew it.
It's not a gotcha question if Trump repeatedly proclaims that his favorite book is the Bible. Santorum, Palin, Huckabee, Jeb, Kasich, Perry, Rubio, Christie, Romney could've aced that question without blinking.
Quote: EvenBobWhen has Hillary been asked
to cite verses from the Babble?
On September 26, 2007. Trump should do his homework, this question was totally predictable.
Quote: NBC NewsTIM RUSSERT: Before we go, there's been a lot of discussion about the Democrats and the issue of faith and values. I want to ask you a simple question. Senator Obama, what is your favorite Bible verse?
OBAMA: Well, I think it would have to be the Sermon on the Mount, because it expresses a basic principle that I think we've lost over the last six years.
John talked about what we've lost. Part of what we've lost is a sense of empathy towards each other. We have been governed in fear and division, and you know, we talk about the federal deficit, but we don't talk enough about the empathy deficit, a sense that I stand in somebody else's shoes, I see through their eyes. People who are struggling trying to figure out how to pay the gas bill, or try to send their kids to college. We are not thinking about them at the federal level.
That's the reason I'm running for president, because I want to restore that.
RUSSERT: I want to give everyone a chance in this. You just take 10 seconds.
Senator Clinton, favorite Bible verse?
CLINTON: The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I think it's a good rule for politics, too.
RUSSERT: Senator Gravel?
GRAVEL: The most important thing in life is love. That's what empowers courage, and courage implements the rest of our virtues.
RUSSERT: Congressman Kucinich?
KUCINICH: I carry that with me at every debate, this prayer from St. Francis, which says, Lord, make me an instrument of your peace, and I believe very strongly that all of us can be instruments of peace. And that's what I try to bring to public life.
RUSSERT: Senator Edwards?
EDWARDS: It appears many times in the Bible, What you do onto the least of those, you do onto me.
RUSSERT: Governor Richardson?
RICHARDSON: The Sermon on the Mount, because I believe it's an issue of social justice, equality, brotherly issues reflecting a nation that is deeply torn and needs to be heal and come together.
DODD: The Good Samaritan would be a worthwhile sort of description of who we all ought to be in life.
RUSSERT: Senator Biden?
BIDEN: Christ's warning of the Pharisees. There are many Pharisees, and it's part of what has bankrupted some people's view about religion. And I worry about the Pharisees.
Quote: TomGExactly. Which proves that none of them are conservative
I think that it proves that none of them can reign in Congress. It doesn't prove that none of them are conservative
Quote: AZDuffmanIf Trump gets the nod I would vote for him with no hesitation...
One of the few things that liberals like about Trump is that he is promising to raise taxes on the wealthy job creators.
Here's what he said last Wednesday:
Quote: Bloomberg News"I would take carried interest out, and I would let people making hundreds of millions of dollars-a-year pay some tax, because right now they are paying very little tax and I think it's outrageous," Trump said. "I want to lower taxes for the middle class."
Asked whether his proposed changes meant he was prepared to raise taxes on himself, the billionaire framed his answer in terms of fairness.
"That's right. That's right. I'm OK with it. You've seen my statements, I do very well, I don't mind paying some taxes. The middle class is getting clobbered in this country. You know the middle class built this country, not the hedge fund guys, but I know people in hedge funds that pay almost nothing and it's ridiculous, OK?"
His reference to “carried interest out,” is about closing the loophole that allows investment income to be taxed at a much lower rate than ordinary income. This change would affect hedge fund managers and millionaires who earn most of their income through investment vehicles. (It's also just a symbolic gesture, since closing the carried interest loophole would only earn Uncle Sam about $2 billion.) Last week Trump belittled hedge-fund managers as guys who “didn’t build this country. These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky.”
If you had told me back in May that the GOP frontrunner would be dabbling in class warfare rhetoric and promising to raise taxes on the rich, I wouldn't have believed you.
Quote: Gabes22I don't think none of that constitutes a mic drop. None of them could say this passage comes from the Book of "X" verses "X-Y" all they did was name passages that a third grader could rattle off
They were asked the question.
It is not a gotcha question for anyone on the right or left. End of story.
That being said, who cares.
It's just clear to anyone with eyes and ears and a brain that Trump is not a religious man by any stretch of the imagination. He's just pandering to a key portion of the Republican base by pretending to love the Bible.
Nothing wrong with that, politicians pander all the time. But he got caught with his pants down when they asked that question.
Despite that this social issue has dominated my political views and stance for a many years, I do have sympathy for those that truly have a conflict with their religious views. But if you are in an employment position where that is a conflict, you have the option to find another line of work.
But here's the thing that inspired this post. We have known for a while that Ms Davis is on husband #4....3 divorces. (actually husband number 4 was also one of the previous 3, so technically she is on husband number 3 a second time through). That's hypocritical enough, but tonight we learned that Ms Davis gave birth to twin girls, 5 months after divorcing husband number 1. Those twin girls were adopted by husband number 2, who Ms Davis was married to at the time she gave birth. BUT the father of the twin girls was neither husband number 1, nor husband number 2. It was a third man, who would later become husband number 3!
Ms Davis, a self proclaimed expert on the bible's position on marriage (but apparently not divorce), also apparently conveniently overlooks the bibles position on adultery. She has 'earned' the expansion from 'hypocrite' to "hillbilly hypocrite".
Quote: kewljMs Davis, a self proclaimed expert on the bible's position on marriage (but apparently not divorce), also apparently conveniently overlooks the bibles position on adultery. She has 'earned' the expansion from 'hypocrite' to "hillbilly hypocrite".
Ms Davis, a self proclaimed expert on positions...
Anyway, I don't care what she did...she could be clean as a whistle...if she can't comply with the ruling she must refuse and suffer the consequences (contempt, etc.) if she wants to "peacefully protest"...or quit.
I don't have to agree with a ruling to know that government officials need to enforce and comply...they can still disagree, of course...
The lady just wants attention. Her ultimate goal is to be removed from her position by force. It will make a great photo op. Outraged righties will donate money to her. She'll be set for life. She can go away and marry for the fifth time or something.
Quote: ams288A hypocritical religious wingnut enforcing their dogmatic views on others while ignoring them in their own personal life? Color me shocked!
The lady just wants attention. Her ultimate goal is to be removed from her position by force. It will make a great photo op. Outraged righties will donate money to her. She'll be set for life. She can go away and marry for the fifth time or something.
I don't recall pro-gay marriage forces having a problem when that Mayor in Upstate NY was issuing licenses to gays in spite of the law against. This woman should be offered another job at the courthouse where it will not be an issue. Same to anyone else in the nation in a similar job.
Quote: kewljSpeaking of religion, and loving the bible. Kim Davis...The Kentucky county clerk who has refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples since the SCOTUS ruling...
The same state where it's ok to marry your cousin....ahahahaha. These religious folks are pathetic and need mental help.
Quote: AZDuffmanI don't recall pro-gay marriage forces having a problem when that Mayor in Upstate NY was issuing licenses to gays in spite of the law against.
Why would we have a problem with him? He was on the right side of history.
Quote: AZDuffmanThis woman should be offered another job at the courthouse where it will not be an issue. Same to anyone else in the nation in a similar job.
Rowan County does have a job listing for Lawn Maintenance with a listed salary of $8.01 - $8.66 per hour. I wonder if her religious beliefs are strong enough for her to accept that position instead of dealing with the predicament of her current position.
Quote: AZDuffmanI don't recall pro-gay marriage forces having a problem when that Mayor in Upstate NY was issuing licenses to gays in spite of the law against. This woman should be offered another job at the courthouse where it will not be an issue. Same to anyone else in the nation in a similar job.
Big difference
Kim Davis has lost every court battle
New Paltz Town Court Justice Jonathan Katz dismissed the charges against Mayor West, ruling that the district attorney had failed to show that the state had a legitimate interest in preventing the marriages, or that the law under which West was charged was constitutional
So if you are "on the right side of history," or in other words your point of view, it is perfectly all right to violate the law. With no consequences. How fascinating!Quote: ams288Why would we have a problem with him? He was on the right side of history.
Quote: SanchoPanzaSo if you are "on the right side of history," or in other words your point of view, it is perfectly all right to violate the law. With no consequences. How fascinating!
Here's a quick tip-
The side that is pro-civil rights is typically the one on the "right side of history."
There is a major difference between civil disobedience and violations of law. Those who cannot see the distinction are doomed to failure.Quote: ams288Here's a quick tip- The side that is pro-civil rights is typically the one on the "right side of history."
Quote: SanchoPanzaThere is a major difference between civil disobedience and violations of law. Those who cannot see the distinction are doomed to failure.
There is also difference between acts of civil disobedience and doing or not doing a job that you are being paid to do. She is being paid to issue marriage licenses. If she has a conflict and cannot do that job, she needs to resign and find something that she is comfortable with. Why should the taxpayers pay her to not do the job she was hired for or in this case elected to and swore to do.
Quote: SanchoPanzaThere is a major difference between civil disobedience and violations of law. Those who cannot see the distinction are doomed to failure.
I can say that she should be fired for not following the court order (or removed from that position and placed in another one) but gay marriage supporters can't say the same thing when someone mentions a person issuing licenses before it was legal. Both were wrong and should have been moved immediately out of those positions without regard for potential civil or criminal prosecution.
This:
"New Paltz Town Court Justice Jonathan Katz dismissed the charges against Mayor West, ruling that the district attorney had failed to show that the state had a legitimate interest in preventing the marriages, or that the law under which West was charged was constitutional"
Does not mean that he should have kept his position while issuing license that were not legal to issue. He was not carrying out his duties. That is not always a criminal issue...
Quote: ams288Why would we have a problem with him? He was on the right side of history.
Lets let history decide that in about 50 years.
Quote: ams288Here's a quick tip-
The side that is pro-civil rights is typically the one on the "right side of history."
It was not a matter of "civil rights." It was redefining an institution.
As to pro-civil rights and RSOH, I'd put it more at 50/50. Affirmative Action and school bussing were both colossal failures, as has been the War on Poverty. Lets not forget trying to stamp out "disparate impact" in mortgage loans! As I said above, check back in 50 years.
Quote: ams288I think a lot of people on the left are (rightly) having a blast with this story because the woman is such a giant hypocrite. Even her supporters are having trouble defending her. She's been divorced three times. She's done more to damage the "sanctity" of marriage than any of the gay couples she's denying Constitutional rights to.
Fantastic. Have fun with it. I have already stated that she should be fired; I like the suggestion of moving her to another job if one is available...whatever...she should not be allowed to remain in the same position if she refuses to do her job properly.
There. Not hard to say.
Are you willing to say the same thing about the Mayor?
Quote: AZDuffmanLets let history decide that in about 50 years.
It was not a matter of "civil rights." It was redefining an institution.
78% of people under 30 support gay marriage, including 61% of republicans under 30, so good luck with that.
You are just one of those sad guys, refusing to accept reality, refusing to accept change, left standing there holding your confederate flag, longing for the past.
Quote: RonCFantastic. Have fun with it. I have already stated that she should be fired;
Sometimes you respond to some my posts as if I was directly targeting them at you. I wasn't.
Quote: kewlj78% of people under 30 support gay marriage, including 61% of republicans under 30, so good luck with that.
You are just one of those sad guys, refusing to accept reality, refusing to accept change, left standing there holding your confederate flag, longing for the past.
I'm assuming this is in reference to his belief that the gay rights movement has some shady secret agenda that they will be pushing in the coming years, now that the fight over marriage is over. But he refuses to specify what that agenda is.
Quote: kewlj78% of people under 30 support gay marriage, including 61% of republicans under 30, so good luck with that.
You are just one of those sad guys, refusing to accept reality, refusing to accept change, left standing there holding your confederate flag, longing for the past.
No, I am a guy that sees the collapse of society happening. So many people are used to the collapse that they do not even notice how bad things have gotten.
I don't care how many people support it, that does not make it a good idea.
BTW: ever hear the phrase "young and dumb?" I am not changing my mind because "young people support it." They support it due to a lifetime of indoctrination. History can show which of us is on the right side. You are not history, so you do not get to do so,
it's like getting the right to hit yourself in the
head with a hammer. You want it? You got it.
Quote: AZDuffmanNo, I am a guy that sees the collapse of society happening.
Collapse of society? So be it, I guess...
I'll be doing my part to contribute to societal collapse this evening with a hot 20 year old twink!
Quote: ams288Collapse of society? So be it, I guess...
I'll be doing my part to contribute to societal collapse this evening with a hot 20 year old twink!
Yes. Not because of the homophile thing alone, but we are in a society in early phases of collapse. I really do not care how you spend your evening.
something else. It's an ongoing process that moves so
slowly we can't see it's motion. My wife's 103 old grandma
was born into a completely different society in 1912 than
the one she lives in today. Different in so many ways they
are too numerous to name.
Quote: EvenBobEvery society is always in collapse and morphing into
something else. It's an ongoing process that moves so
slowly we can't see it's motion. My wife's 103 old grandma
was born into a completely different society in 1912 than
the one she lives in today. Different in so many ways they
are too numerous to name.
"Different" is one thing. I am talking about how we are getting to the point that 30-40% of people can't even manage to survive on their own. More and more civil unrest. No standards on behavior. What is coming will be both major and painful. Decline has been happening for just over 50 years now. Collapse is starting.
to shift and mold and continue on, just like we always
do. It may be painful, but it's an ongoing process that
has no end.
Quote: EvenBobI don't believe that. We aren't idiots, we will manage
to shift and mold and continue on, just like we always
do. It may be painful, but it's an ongoing process that
has no end.
It is a cycle thing, we are due for a major, painful change. Due for an "upheaval" decade. It cannot be avoided. I am talking 1860s or 1932-45 in scope. With violence, lots of it.
changes. They now say the Eastern seaboard
of the US, from Fl to Maine, was home to a
couple million Native Americans up to the
1500's. It was a huge and thriving Indian
society that was wiped out in no time by
measles and chicken pox. Talk about a
society change. The fact that so many lived
on the coast was not known until just a
few years ago.
Quote: AZDuffmanHistory can show which of us is on the right side.
Gay marriage has been legal in the US and Canada for over 10 years now. What has that decade of history shown us so far?
Quote: AZDuffmanIt is a cycle thing, we are due for a major, painful change. Due for an "upheaval" decade. It cannot be avoided. I am talking 1860s or 1932-45 in scope. With violence, lots of it.
Quote: TomGGay marriage has been legal in the US and Canada for over 10 years now. What has that decade of history shown us so far?
I have posted in DT. More and more people not knowing what they "identify" as to start. Leads to the breakdown of proper gender roles and a less mentally healthy society. We will see more and more of this. I have a very strong feeling what starts to come next. Will take a decade or so for it to happen, But when it does people will think it is "normal" when today it sickens them.
Quote: AZDuffmanI have posted in DT. More and more people not knowing what they "identify" as to start. Leads to the breakdown of proper gender roles and a less mentally healthy society. We will see more and more of this. I have a very strong feeling what starts to come next. Will take a decade or so for it to happen, But when it does people will think it is "normal" when today it sickens them.
And I will repost my reply from DT to AZ here regarding the subject of sexual identity.
People have been sexual beings since well, since forever.
People have had various sexual desires since , well, forever
The human body has not changed.
The only thing that has changed is we have the internet so its out in the open and discussed.
You think censorship will put the genie back in the bottle, got news for you, genie was never in the bottle throughout the history of mankind
Even J Edgar Hoover had his unusual desires.
Its just human nature which has not changed through the centuries.
I can see AZ as a Roman observing Caligula and saying "I don't care what anyone says, this is not a good thing"
But the Human race marches forward due to sex and babies as it always had, as it always will.
Nothing has changed except the internet where people are discussing it and honestly talking about sexual desire that has always been there through the history of mankind.
Quote: terapinedAnd I will repost my reply from DT to AZ here regarding the subject of sexual identity.
People have been sexual beings since well, since forever.
People have had various sexual desires since , well, forever
The human body has not changed.
The only thing that has changed is we have the internet so its out in the open and discussed.
You think censorship will put the genie back in the bottle, got news for you, genie was never in the bottle throughout the history of mankind
Even J Edgar Hoover had his unusual desires.
Its just human nature which has not changed through the centuries.
I can see AZ as a Roman observing Caligula and saying "I don't care what anyone says, this is not a good thing"
But the Human race marches forward due to sex and babies as it always had, as it always will.
Nothing has changed except the internet where people are discussing it and honestly talking about sexual desire that has always been there through the history of mankind.
I rest my case on "the new normal."
Quote: AZDuffmanLeads to the breakdown of proper gender roles and a less mentally healthy society.
I am very sorry that legalizing gay marriage has had such a negative impact on your mental health. Help is available.
Quote: TomGI am very sorry that legalizing gay marriage has had such a negative impact on your mental health. Help is available.
Hasn't affected mine. I now as always have known I am a 100% straight male. However, the people who think that 25% or more of society is homosexual might need some things explained to them.
Quote: ams288Sometimes you respond to some my posts as if I was directly targeting them at you. I wasn't.
Let me make it a direct question to you (and anyone else) who thinks the lady was wrong and Mayor was right as relates to their respective duties in office.
Is it hypocritical to call for the firing, jailing, etc. of a lady who refuses to issue a marriage license to a gay couple when it is her duty (under the law and court order) to do so but to defend the issuing of marriage licenses to gay couples before they were legal?
Quote: AZDuffmanI rest my case on "the new normal."
????? There is no new normal.
The Human body has not changed.
The point I was making is that a portion of the human race has struggled with sexual identity since the dawn of time.
Nothing has changed sexually in the human body over the centuries.
Quote: RonCLet me make it a direct question to you (and anyone else) who thinks the lady was wrong and Mayor was right as relates to their respective duties in office.
Is it hypocritical to call for the firing, jailing, etc. of a lady who refuses to issue a marriage license to a gay couple when it is her duty (under the law and court order) to do so but to defend the issuing of marriage licenses to gay couples before they were legal?
Incoming pedantry...
Hypocrisy or being hypocritical is to claim a belief or standard that one doesn't actually hold. I for one have little to no issue with issuing of "illegitimate" certificates whereas I'd like to give this lady a stiff punch in the face. That in and of itself is not hypocrisy; it's just an opinion.
Mrs. x5 claiming "because Jesus" about everything yet having illegitimate children with a man she cheated on hubby #2 with on her way to 4 broken marriages, THAT is hypocrisy.
One was "wrong" because it was, I suppose, technically against the law. Or at least not covered by the law (or maybe it was, I dunno. Who cares). The other is wrong on so many more levels, of which only the part about the law is similar.
If anyone claims firing specifically because of the law, yet only places it on one party, then it becomes hypocritical.
