American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Punter127;443452][B]You really can't possibly imagine how much I don't care what you think![/B]
But what in the fuck would a pathetic little loser like you know about intelligent people?
snip- well you can just go fuck yourself for all I care.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Punter127;443478]Bullshit!
You started by post this right behind one of my post.
Btw I'm finished arguing with you, you can have the last insult.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Punter127;441617]You just don't get it do you? snip
. So you can scream your meaningless opinion from the fucking roof tops if you like, snip.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Punter127;443629]
I'm fairly sure we'll have to endure at least one more unsubstantiated tirade from Mr. RcC. But as far as I'm concerned unless he can substantiate his claims his rants are meaningless.

Time to move on.[/QUOTE]You are accusing someone of tirades and rants, the king of tirades and rants? Most accusations you make can be turned right back at you, hypocritical they are. In the very post you start off by stating that you're not going to address the independent voter issue, then you contradicted yourself by doing so. Once again proving your words are meaningless as you typically say and do the opposite thing.

You should thank me for guiding you to having a civil discussion where you 'weren't flipping out with anger, you're welcome.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;443534]Punter, a mutual acquaintance told me you hail from the same state as I do. If you still vote there, you might want to consider the Democrat candidates for the Criminal Court of Appeals, especially for the positions where no Libertarian is running. I suspect they're more likely to implement the liberal ideals you and I believe in, although to be honest I've never studied the positions of the individual candidates.[/QUOTE]Thanks for the suggestion, despite the bogus picture some try to paint of me I always try to look at all the candidates. The only time I rule out a candidate by party (applies both main parties) is if I think they will let the party bosses control them, like so many of the Blue Dog Democrats did.

I'll give your suggestion some thought.

BTW, I agree that you and I fit the definition of true liberals, but I stopped saying I'm a liberal long ago because IMHO the left-wingers have hijacked the word and bastardized it. Similar to what some are trying to do with the definition of an independent voter.

[QUOTE=Punter127;443452]I just don't understand why you and so many others on the left seem to be unable to hold a debate or discussion without turning to insults. It seems every time you can't make a point or if someone disagrees, here come the insults. How Pathetic![/QUOTE]Hear! Hear!

Thank You!

Jax

A TKO for RC Collins.

The word "seems", lost in the torrent of accusations & allegations. The escape clause! Whitewashing of verbal abuse, sugar-coated as metaphors and humor when confronted. Bogus!! For sure, nailed to the cross.

[QUOTE=Punter127;443634]Thanks for the suggestion, despite the bogus picture some try to paint of me I always try to look at all the candidates. The only time I rule out a candidate by party (applies both main parties) is if I think they will let the party bosses control them, like so many of the Blue Dog Democrats did.

I'll give your suggestion some thought.

BTW, I agree that you and I fit the definition of true liberals, but I stopped saying I'm a liberal long ago because IMHO the left-wingers have hijacked the word and bastardized it. Similar to what some are trying to do with the definition of an independent voter.[/QUOTE]I believe most Democrats promote policies that are bad for the economy and bad for me. Normally I don't vote for them at the national level. I used to vote for a Democrat Congressman who shared my views on many issues and was not, at first, controlled by party bosses. In hindsight maybe I should have voted for Clinton when he ran against Dole. Except for raising taxes, Clinton did most things right. He might not have, though, if it weren't for Republicans in Congress.

When it comes to crime and punishment, Democrats on the whole are more in line with my way of thinking than mainstream Republicans. They're not as inclined to lock people up and throw away the key, make possession of pot a felony, impose the death penalty, allow the police to stop you in your car and take and keep all your money without ever charging you, etc. That's why I've voted for them for the Criminal Court of Appeals.

Anyway, your "affiliation" as an Independent means you think for yourself, and that should be applauded. There are too many people out there, both Democrats and Republicans, who don't, and who reflexively support ANY policy and any candidate promoted by their party. That's just bad.

The way the White House and congress is situated now I don't think much is going to happen the next 2 years.

Pres. Obama and the Dems want:

2 yr. Free junior college, tax the rich, paid medical leave, babysitting reimbursement, raise the minimum wage, vocational training, etc.

Republicans want:

Keystone XL Pipeline, stop abortions, NO immigration bill, stop gay marriages etc.

I don't think any of these programs or ideas are going to pass. Obama will be doing a lot of vetoeing and congress and be doing a lot of blocking of these bills.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;443644]I believe most Democrats promote policies that are bad for the economy and bad for me. Normally I don't vote for them at the national level. I used to vote for a Democrat Congressman who shared my views on many issues and was not, at first, controlled by party bosses. In hindsight maybe I should have voted for Clinton when he ran against Dole. Except for raising taxes, Clinton did most things right. He might not have, though, if it weren't for Republicans in Congress.

When it comes to crime and punishment, Democrats on the whole are more in line with my way of thinking than mainstream Republicans. They're not as inclined to lock people up and throw away the key, make possession of pot a felony, impose the death penalty, allow the police to stop you in your car and take and keep all your money without ever charging you, etc. That's why I've voted for them for the Criminal Court of Appeals.[/QUOTE]I agree with you about Democrat policies and will go a step farther and say some of those policies are bad for the American people and often go against our founding principles. The 1996 election was one of those elections where I wanted to vote "none of the above".

I never thought Dole would make a good president and I didn't see Perot a viable option. I saw Clinton as to far to the left especially on health care and the Second Amendment. But I think you're right about the Republicans in Congress keeping him in check. But I also felt both he and the Republicans had sold out the American people with NAFTA. However I must praise him for moving to the center and working with the Republican Congress after the failure of Hillary care.

When it comes to crime and punishment I have mixed emotions. I think there are some crimes heinous enough to warrant the death penalty especially violent crime against children. But I can certainly understand why some people don't support it. I just don't have much sympathy for those who commit violent crimes or repeat offenders.

Having said that I think we have a lot of crimes that should not be considered crimes. For example I think recreational drugs and prostitution should be legal, I believe in euthanasia and the right to die, it's your body and I support individual rights, as long as you don't hurt other people. I also strongly oppose the militarization of local police agencies, if conditions deteriorate to the point of needing military type forces we should utilize the National Guard. The police should be protecters not intimidators, and they should strive to be part of the community and not an occupying force.

While I agree with your thinking about judges, the problem is they can be limited and controlled by the legislative branch with laws such as mandatory sentencing. But it's a good idea for as long as it last.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;443644]There are too many people out there, both Democrats and Republicans, who don't, and who reflexively support ANY policy and any candidate promoted by their party. That's just bad.[/QUOTE]I could not agree more, it seems like they think of it as a sport, their team can do no wrong and wining is everything.

[QUOTE=RevBS;443641]A TKO for RC Collins.

The word "seems", lost in the torrent of accusations & allegations. The escape clause! Whitewashing of verbal abuse, sugar-coated as metaphors and humor when confronted. Bogus!! For sure, nailed to the cross.[/QUOTE]Thanks Rev, you nailed it! Did you see the State of the Union Speech, if so what are your thoughts?

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cse5cCGuHmE[/URL]

[URL]http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/01/23/could-john-kasichs-balanced-budget-tour-set-up-2016-bid/[/URL]

Why not? History points to a Republican win in 2016 but they will be bog down by the Immigration swamp that they are so unwilling to compromise on. Romney or Bush? If so, you are saying you really want Hilary Clinton? If not, who? Rubio should be selling lemonade and Cruz, fajitas. But here's a guy that maybe I could check out and be happy with. Obama has set the stage for the US to strengthen and progress forward, and Kasich can cement it with a pragmatic approach.

Upon further review.

[QUOTE=RevBS;443660][URL]http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/01/23/could-john-kasichs-balanced-budget-tour-set-up-2016-bid/[/URL]

Why not? History points to a Republican win in 2016 but they will be bog down by the Immigration swamp that they are so unwilling to compromise on. Romney or Bush? If so, you are saying you really want Hilary Clinton? If not, who? Rubio should be selling lemonade and Cruz, fajitas. But here's a guy that maybe I could check out and be happy with. Obama has set the stage for the US to strengthen and progress forward, and Kasich can cement it with a pragmatic approach.

Upon further review.[/QUOTE]Kasich might be my top pick for President for 2016, who I believe would do the best job of the possible candidates. He was re-elected governor of Ohio in 2014 by 30 percentage points. This is despite him being a Republican, and Ohio voting for Obama in 2008 and 2012. He took on the teacher's unions, repealed the estate tax, cut the income tax, and balanced the budget four years in a row.

[URL]http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/01/republicans_comparing_barack_obama_to_hitler_my_favorite_examples_of_the.htmlere[/URL]

Yes, we are all capable of saying stupid stuff, especially when we are angry. And there are more than enough people who are mad at Obama. Enough to even compare Obama to Hitler. Some of you might recognize yourselves in this article. I mean in the mirror.

[size=+1][B]"RATINGS: FOX #1 FOR 13TH YEAR, MSNBC COLLAPSES BY DOUBLE DIGITS"[/B][/size]

[QUOTE]Ratings for January 2015 show that for the 13th year in a row Fox News beat its left-wing competition at CNN and MSNBC. Fox is the leader in all areas: total viewers and demo viewers. MSNBC had a terrible January, [u]losing -23% of total viewers and -39% of demo viewers in primetime [/u]compared to January of last year. CNN boosted its viewership by double digits but had nowhere to go but up.
CNNs turn to the political left is obviously draining viewers away from MSNBC. CNN has beat MSNBC for seven consecutive months now.
Despite being blacked out from millions of potential viewers due to a (now resolved) dispute with Dish Network for three weeks in this ratings period of January, [b]Fox News is still king.[/b][/QUOTE]If you go back and RTFF you would find what [U]seems[/U] like endless attacks on Fox News, and an attempt to paint Fox as the worst news outlet ever. But how do you stay number one for thirteen fucking years in a row if you're not doing something right?

The attacks on Fox News are nothing more than just another attempt by progressives to destroy the credibility of anyone who stands to the right or just disagrees with them, IMHO.

The only American news station I happen to have is Fox. I have not allowed it to discourage my outlook on life and people. Since the channel is right next to Bloomberg, I do stop there occasionally to get a dose of morning sickness. And to put a crimp on the cobra under my pajamas. Lately, Hannity and O'Reilly have their lost their potency. Now, the sure cure is Megyn Kelley. Her slightly nasal hard tone combined with the stridency of her rapid-fire delivery is the antidote to any aspiring hardness.

Yes, you could make a case about the authenticity of my promising cobra head but that is irrelevant. It is just sad to report that I have witnessed the evolution and loss of american femininity in the course of my life. And it is spreading fast.

The idea that high ratings equates to creditably is so cartoonish that Jerry Springer who has a show with absolutely no redeeming value or credibility but a higher rating that all news shows (including Fox) combined would find this conclusion illogical. Less than 10% of the American populous consistently watch cable news show or are regular devoted viewers so that is the number being fought over here.

Don't remember anyone here attacking Fox but do recall members, myself including saying that Fox was not fair nor credible. Prior to the 2012 elections, every Karl (Rove) Dick (Morris) and Hannity on Fox told their audience the election was in the bag for Romney. They said this despite all the polls that showed Romney was going to lose. We all know how that turned out and Dick hasn't been seen on Fox since.

That Fox is fair or creditable is akin to saying that reality shows whose rating are all higher than Fox and all other cable news shows combined are also credible or real because their rating are the highest. As Mike Tyson would say, that's ludicrous. Take note of how many times Fox has erred with erroneous graphics and wording only to offer insincere five second apologies. Notice that their errors are always made to paint the Democrats and Obama in a negative light.

Fox has been the ratings leader in the cable news programs for some time now but despite their high rating and non-stop Obama bashing they couldn't push their candidates over the finish line in the last two national elections. Surely if they has so much credibility they could have been the difference maker, alas they were not. The car crash effect, the confrontations and the female leg shots all have something to do with the ratings as not only conservatives are watching Fox.

Fox is also the leading news organization with erroneous information 31 percent of the time and Forbes found that Fox News voters are the most uninformed. Not hard to see why after the last two national elections.

[URL]http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Punter127;443734]

If you go back and RTFF you would find what [U]seems[/U] like endless attacks on Fox News, and an attempt to paint Fox as the worst news outlet ever. But how do you stay number one for thirteen fucking years in a row if you're not doing something right?

The attacks on Fox News are nothing more than just another attempt by progressives to destroy the credibility of anyone who stands to the right or just disagrees with them, IMHO.[/QUOTE]Fox News is essentially the "news" equivalent of the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment). All intelligent people understand that both Fox News and the WWE are fake and not to be taken seriously are useful merely for their entertainment value. Not coincidentally Fox New's viewer base is probably identical to the WWE's view base.