Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Tragic Death of the Democratic Party The Tragic Death of the Democratic Party

11-06-2018 , 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkubus
The cognitive dissonance that people experience on these issues is astounding. I doubt there are too many retirees on social security who think of themselves as being on welfare.

Anytime I care to have the argument I can't even get my right-leaning friends to admit that Social Security is socialism. Because American doesn't do the socialism, but we do Social Security, ergo it can't be socialism.
Is there a good comeback to "well, I paid into that!"? Because that's what I've heard when I've brought it up to people like my Dad. Like, it's socialism, but sort of tied to how much you put in.
11-06-2018 , 01:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsedToBeGood
Is there a good comeback to "well, I paid into that!"? Because that's what I've heard when I've brought it up to people like my Dad. Like, it's socialism, but sort of tied to how much you put in.
The government is subsidizing above market returns for them.
11-06-2018 , 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsedToBeGood
Is there a good comeback to "well, I paid into that!"? Because that's what I've heard when I've brought it up to people like my Dad. Like, it's socialism, but sort of tied to how much you put in.
We all pay into the government every day with almost everything we do. Wouldn't it be cool if we also got some tangible benefits for those contributions we make? Like, instead of just spending all of it on fighter jets and old ppl.

Also the money he's getting out of social security isn't the money he paid in. It's way more than that, and it's money that YOU are paying in to subsidize him.
11-06-2018 , 02:19 PM


...
11-06-2018 , 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark


...
This **** needs to retire. Holy ****.
11-06-2018 , 02:34 PM
If these ****ing idiots truly believe that THIS time, Lucy won't pull back the football, WAAF.
11-06-2018 , 02:48 PM
Assuming Dems take house, and Nancy is persona non grata for speaker, who is realistic? Anyone with some actual balls, or is the DNC powerful enough to plant another centrist wet noodle in her place?
11-06-2018 , 03:04 PM
Ted Lieu?
11-06-2018 , 03:09 PM
Lieu would be my choice even though he’s not in line for presidential succession
11-06-2018 , 03:10 PM
She's out there today saying she's 100% certain we will win the house. After 2016. How stupid do you have to be to not realize that on election day your only job is to scare the crap out of your own voters?

Seriously Pelosi is complete garbage, as are the rest of her political generation. The GOP pols are straight up evil and the Dems are straight up incompetent. None of them really want anything to change because they and their peers like the status quo just fine.

I'm not complaining about my lot in life because I'm doing fine... but I ran really good and I know a lot of people who didn't. I'm not very liberal... But I definitely believe that healthcare is a similar product to fire protection or police protection. I also believe that investments in education, infrastructure, and basic scientific research pay off really hard over long time periods. I'd pretty much push those to diminishing returns.

Nothing above is revolutionary or should be hard to do. All are pretty much settled out in the real world among people who actually understand how stuff works.
11-06-2018 , 03:14 PM
Pelosi's actually been good as dem leader of the house. She's gotten votes on a team where everyone is all over the place.

Talking outside of that, she's been lol bad though.
11-06-2018 , 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheatrich
Pelosi's actually been good as dem leader of the house. She's gotten votes on a team where everyone is all over the place.

Talking outside of that, she's been lol bad though.
Isn't that the whip's job?
11-06-2018 , 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otatop
If these ****ing idiots truly believe that THIS time, Lucy won't pull back the football, WAAF.
They aren't getting fooled; they just aren't as opposed to much of the Republican agenda as they would like you to think.
11-12-2018 , 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuserounder
So when the overwhelming majority of the country supports a ban on the purchasing of guns by people on the terror watch list, and Republicans do nothing, that would be....?
A.) A majority of people do not support this measure
B.) It does not matter if a majority of people support it, it is unconstitutional(99% of gun laws are but we will stay focused here)
C.) There is no evidence implementing this law would have a positive effect on reducing the number of crimes committed with firearms.
D.) it would be upholding the constitution and bill of rights. It would be following their oaths or office. It would be doing the right thing.
11-12-2018 , 02:23 PM
What's your take on Trump gutting the 14th Amendment via EO there Hotrod?
11-12-2018 , 02:32 PM
I mean, you'd have to think the supreme court was wrong for over 200+ years and *only correct* for the last ~5-25 to have the beliefs hotrod does.
11-12-2018 , 02:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otatop
What's your take on Trump gutting the 14th Amendment via EO there Hotrod?
IDK man, not a fan of it on its fave. I don’t think he has the power to do it. I gotta read up on it more so I can understand where he’s coming from legally. I get that it’s something people can and do easily exploit but I don’t think we should just throw the baby out with the bath water. To me, this is a problem
Solve by rigorous and consistent enforcement of immigration and modernizering and stream lining or naturalization process.
11-12-2018 , 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
I mean, you'd have to think the supreme court was wrong for over 200+ years and *only correct* for the last ~5-25 to have the beliefs hotrod does.
Please elaborate....
11-12-2018 , 05:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotrodsather
IDK man, not a fan of it on its fave. I don’t think he has the power to do it. I gotta read up on it more so I can understand where he’s coming from legally. I get that it’s something people can and do easily exploit but I don’t think we should just throw the baby out with the bath water. To me, this is a problem
Solve by rigorous and consistent enforcement of immigration and modernizering and stream lining or naturalization process.
lol you think Trump has his own legal perspective on the 14th? Your trolling in these threads is pretty sub-par
11-12-2018 , 05:20 PM
And one of the leads on CNN is an opinion piece about Hillary's suckfish advisors ginning her up as the "right" choice in 2020.

Awesome. I'd guess that by the Bill will be wetting himself in public, and we're going to be treated to nonestop "Lock her up" pieces. It's like a nightmare you can't wake up from....

MM MD
11-12-2018 , 05:54 PM
Hillary now wants Trump to win. It's the only logic that makes sense. I mean she has zero chance of winning. Even most people who voted for her were pretty unenthusiastic. If she cared that much about the future of the world, she'd go the **** away.

Her family is loaded and all of the things going down have helped her financially. Why would she want Trump to leave office?
11-12-2018 , 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotrodsather
A.) A majority of people do not support this measure
B.) It does not matter if a majority of people support it, it is unconstitutional(99% of gun laws are but we will stay focused here)
C.) There is no evidence implementing this law would have a positive effect on reducing the number of crimes committed with firearms.
D.) it would be upholding the constitution and bill of rights. It would be following their oaths or office. It would be doing the right thing.
A) 86% of Americans support it, so you're just completely and utterly wrong. (Link: https://www.rollcall.com/news/politi...ts-no-fly-list)

B) The Supreme Court has disagreed with you quite a bit over the years, and courts have generally held that there can be government regulations on the sales of firearms.

C) So you're arguing that letting potential terrorists buy guns is just as safe as not letting potential terrorists buy guns?

D) You're repeating yourself, but you're still just as wrong.
11-12-2018 , 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
Hillary now wants Trump to win. It's the only logic that makes sense. I mean she has zero chance of winning. Even most people who voted for her were pretty unenthusiastic. If she cared that much about the future of the world, she'd go the **** away.

Her family is loaded and all of the things going down have helped her financially. Why would she want Trump to leave office?
Hillary literally vacations w Henry Kissinger, she wants power, it's as simple as that
11-12-2018 , 07:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotrodsather
It does not matter if a majority of people support it, it is unconstitutional(99% of gun laws are but we will stay focused here)
Lets explore this one!

It is illegal for Americans to own a full automatic machine gun. Is this unconstitutional? If so, why?
11-12-2018 , 09:51 PM
Nukes and biological weapons. Those are arms.

      
m