Cast your vote
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Rocky Anderson, Justice Party is my choice. Google him - he's the solution to many of our problems. We need legitimate third and fourth parties to get the Dems and Repubs off their asses.
Every Canadian that I have talked to view the Republican party as an unbelievably bad choice.
The Republicans created the financial mess that Obama had to inherit.
The Republicans seem more interested in blocking the Democrats every move than working together for the good of the USA.
The Republicans created the financial mess that Obama had to inherit.
The Republicans seem more interested in blocking the Democrats every move than working together for the good of the USA.
SSG
That financial mess was created by both parties, government got to big, every incumbent should go bye-bye.
That financial mess was created by both parties, government got to big, every incumbent should go bye-bye.
I agree with SSG. The republicans are trying to buy the election they have more money than they know what to with and like SSG mentioned they are trying to suppress the RIGHT to VOTE. They are limiting poll hours with ridiculous times. Making up rules to keep people of voting is inhumane. It is obvious the republicans are scared otherwise why are they going to this measure. Level the playing field and go at this man to man.
Montecore:
Supress voting, you have been listening to much CNN. So, I would tend to think that any person can walk into a voting station, not show proof of ID and we should believe that they are who they say they are? I shutter everytime I vote and am not even asked for my voter registration card or any ID.
The people watching me have no idea who I am, until I tell them who I am.
Heck, you even had to show photo ID just to get into the DNC Convention.
There are too many crooked people in this world, and if I wanted to I could vote whereever I wanted to on voting day, as long as I had a list of the registered voters.
"They are limiting poll hours with ridiculous times", In almost every state you can go an vote early or vote via absentee ballot. I do not see this as suppressing the right to vote.
Supress voting, you have been listening to much CNN. So, I would tend to think that any person can walk into a voting station, not show proof of ID and we should believe that they are who they say they are? I shutter everytime I vote and am not even asked for my voter registration card or any ID.
The people watching me have no idea who I am, until I tell them who I am.
Heck, you even had to show photo ID just to get into the DNC Convention.
There are too many crooked people in this world, and if I wanted to I could vote whereever I wanted to on voting day, as long as I had a list of the registered voters.
"They are limiting poll hours with ridiculous times", In almost every state you can go an vote early or vote via absentee ballot. I do not see this as suppressing the right to vote.
I figure with two months to go to the election, it is time to get this blog rolling.
I must admit most of my view of American politics is through the eyes of CNN, CNBC and CBC Canada.
Having said that the Republicans hard liners (Tea Party) are too extreme for the good of the country. Politics is compromise. Tea Party to me is portrayed as it has to be 100% my way or I will block your motion.
I like Obama because he has a young family that must influence his decisions. Romney seems to be a very rich white guy with five adult children.
The other thing that really bugs me about American politics is the political pandering to religious groups. Religion should have no place in democratic politics. I understand how religious interest groups in the USA try to influence politicians by using the threat of block votes.
I must admit most of my view of American politics is through the eyes of CNN, CNBC and CBC Canada.
Having said that the Republicans hard liners (Tea Party) are too extreme for the good of the country. Politics is compromise. Tea Party to me is portrayed as it has to be 100% my way or I will block your motion.
I like Obama because he has a young family that must influence his decisions. Romney seems to be a very rich white guy with five adult children.
The other thing that really bugs me about American politics is the political pandering to religious groups. Religion should have no place in democratic politics. I understand how religious interest groups in the USA try to influence politicians by using the threat of block votes.
Obama is a very rich black guy, so what's the point? Just because you have younger children does that make your thought or decision process different when governing?
Romney is a businessman, and he is proven, thus the reason for his wealth! With 1.6 trillion owed to China, and 1.1 trillion owed to Japan and a 16 trillion dollar debt, waste in government needs to be cut.
The Tea Party does not control the republican party, it is an extreme element of the Reuplican Party, although they have become very vocal in recent years.
I recommend you listening or watching FOX news everyone in awhile, CNN and CNBC express the extreme left views of the democratic party.
Personally, I am voting for change... many on TV have stated the the US maybe entering another recession, wait....we've never come out of the first recession.
Art
Romney is a businessman, and he is proven, thus the reason for his wealth! With 1.6 trillion owed to China, and 1.1 trillion owed to Japan and a 16 trillion dollar debt, waste in government needs to be cut.
The Tea Party does not control the republican party, it is an extreme element of the Reuplican Party, although they have become very vocal in recent years.
I recommend you listening or watching FOX news everyone in awhile, CNN and CNBC express the extreme left views of the democratic party.
Personally, I am voting for change... many on TV have stated the the US maybe entering another recession, wait....we've never come out of the first recession.
Art
I do get the impression that CNN is a little bit left of center towards the Democrats but hardly extreme. I think that is somewhat because the Republican party make so many non factual statements they are easy to pick on.
CNBC is definitely much more pro Republican.
I do not have access to Fox.
Yes, I definitely think that if you have young children living at home, this puts you way more in touch with a different demographic that would influence your decisions.
I guess my point about rich Presidential candidates is that Romney seems much more from the Corporate elite and Obama does not. Obama seems to me more in touch with lower income people.
CNBC is definitely much more pro Republican.
I do not have access to Fox.
Yes, I definitely think that if you have young children living at home, this puts you way more in touch with a different demographic that would influence your decisions.
I guess my point about rich Presidential candidates is that Romney seems much more from the Corporate elite and Obama does not. Obama seems to me more in touch with lower income people.
If you are not very familiar with Obama's backgound and upbringing, see the movie 2016. It is an honest look at his past, and how and why he belives what he does. It looks heavily at Obama's own writings, and the people he credits with influencing him. Obama wrote " the Dreams of My Father", and those are now his dreams. It is not the dream for our country that most Americans have. It's a nightmare that will bring us down, if we don't make a change.
I have some catching up to do on all these posts so this will be a lot of rambling.
To SSG: Canadians (and NE US) are by nature, much more liberal than the rest of the USA so your views are not surprising...saying that CNBC is more pro Republican is like saying Hitler was more compassionate than Stalin.
The whole "young children vs adult children" argument might be valid in a school board election but the president of the USA is the president of all people of all ages and so
should their perspectives be.
Religion has no place in politics? We would still be under British rule if it weren't for the "Black Robed Regiment" of the Revolutionary War. That's a whole other discussion.
When government or activist judges are mandating that religious institutions must perform abortions on demand, that they have to provide birth control, or hire sexual deviants, that marriage can be something (anything?) other than between a man and a woman, the religious have no choice but to become politically active. Is there a place in politics for homosexuals? Is there a place in politics for Environmentalists? I assume your answer is yes. What makes my cause any less appropriate?
re: Tea Party being extreme...TEA represents "Taxed Enough Already" What is extreme about that.
The flip-side of that is our massive and growing debt. Our debt to GDP ratio is worse than Greece is right now and look at them. We simply can't afford to go further and further in debt.
The Republicans created the financial mess??? I agree that the Republicans have made mistakes but the Democrats took control of the House and Senate on January 3rd, 2007. January 3rd, 2007, was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
Lastly, there was mention of Republican lies. Don't get me started on the Democrat lies but I would be curious to know specifically what lies you feel the Republicans are saying.
To SSG: Canadians (and NE US) are by nature, much more liberal than the rest of the USA so your views are not surprising...saying that CNBC is more pro Republican is like saying Hitler was more compassionate than Stalin.
The whole "young children vs adult children" argument might be valid in a school board election but the president of the USA is the president of all people of all ages and so
should their perspectives be.
Religion has no place in politics? We would still be under British rule if it weren't for the "Black Robed Regiment" of the Revolutionary War. That's a whole other discussion.
When government or activist judges are mandating that religious institutions must perform abortions on demand, that they have to provide birth control, or hire sexual deviants, that marriage can be something (anything?) other than between a man and a woman, the religious have no choice but to become politically active. Is there a place in politics for homosexuals? Is there a place in politics for Environmentalists? I assume your answer is yes. What makes my cause any less appropriate?
re: Tea Party being extreme...TEA represents "Taxed Enough Already" What is extreme about that.
The flip-side of that is our massive and growing debt. Our debt to GDP ratio is worse than Greece is right now and look at them. We simply can't afford to go further and further in debt.
The Republicans created the financial mess??? I agree that the Republicans have made mistakes but the Democrats took control of the House and Senate on January 3rd, 2007. January 3rd, 2007, was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
Lastly, there was mention of Republican lies. Don't get me started on the Democrat lies but I would be curious to know specifically what lies you feel the Republicans are saying.
OLD Glory:
Nice post and I agree with every point, btw was not aware the TEA stood for "taxed Enough already", thanx for that.
Nice post and I agree with every point, btw was not aware the TEA stood for "taxed Enough already", thanx for that.
I am not studied enough in American politics to be able to defend my personal views against obvious pro republican sentiment.
I do feel that the Bush era Republicans paved the way for the financial melt down of the US banking and mortgage system. The Obama administration had no choice but to take on major amounts of new debt to try and contain the crisis.
This was closely followed by the auto crisis forcing more huge amounts of debt to bail out the industry.
Everyone knew at the time, the bill would come due next election.
What is obvious, is, whoever wins the election, I hope they win a majority in both the Congress and Senate. I think, unfortunately, this is not likely.
The USA political system is currently barely functional. The country cannot afford four more years of political gridlock in DC.
The latest poll(for what it is worth) puts the Democrats increasing their lead on the Republicans by 4% with growing support from women, blacks, latinos and US veterans.
I apologize for using the phrase "Republican lies" as it is too incendiary for meaningful discussion.
I do feel that the Bush era Republicans paved the way for the financial melt down of the US banking and mortgage system. The Obama administration had no choice but to take on major amounts of new debt to try and contain the crisis.
This was closely followed by the auto crisis forcing more huge amounts of debt to bail out the industry.
Everyone knew at the time, the bill would come due next election.
What is obvious, is, whoever wins the election, I hope they win a majority in both the Congress and Senate. I think, unfortunately, this is not likely.
The USA political system is currently barely functional. The country cannot afford four more years of political gridlock in DC.
The latest poll(for what it is worth) puts the Democrats increasing their lead on the Republicans by 4% with growing support from women, blacks, latinos and US veterans.
I apologize for using the phrase "Republican lies" as it is too incendiary for meaningful discussion.
Bush asked Congress 17 times (starting in 2001)for an end to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as requests for internal audits. I feel the United Auto Worker Union is what took GM down.
I disagree with your opinion about gridlock. More gridlock would have saved us from Obamacare. Gridlock can be a very good thing.
I don't put any stock in polls, especially this far out. The wording of the questions and the demographics of the sampling can create just about any result you want to see and for the most part, it is the left wing media that does the polling.
Apology Accepted. I too want meaningful discussion. I just wish there were more participants.
I disagree with your opinion about gridlock. More gridlock would have saved us from Obamacare. Gridlock can be a very good thing.
I don't put any stock in polls, especially this far out. The wording of the questions and the demographics of the sampling can create just about any result you want to see and for the most part, it is the left wing media that does the polling.
Apology Accepted. I too want meaningful discussion. I just wish there were more participants.
You can't seriously think the recent debt ceiling debacle, the loss of USA AAA Credit rating, the American public's lowest opinion of the effectiveness of Congress ever recorded somehow makes gridlock a good thing.
I agree the poll thing is very momentary. After I made the post, I reviewed the source and it was a poll of 1,000 people.
Also, I did take some time to read Fox News.
I was shocked to read it as so politically one sided and very pro Republican. I then read a few articles from CNN and realized perhaps it is a little more pro Democrat than I first thought.
I agree the poll thing is very momentary. After I made the post, I reviewed the source and it was a poll of 1,000 people.
Also, I did take some time to read Fox News.
I was shocked to read it as so politically one sided and very pro Republican. I then read a few articles from CNN and realized perhaps it is a little more pro Democrat than I first thought.
You are assuming that gridlock made those issues worse. I contend that many things would be worse if it weren't for gridlock. Take the debt ceiling for instance. A law was passed that established that any increases in the debt ceiling would be offset by budget cuts. The Republicans, some of them anyway, wanted Congress to uphold that law under the belief that we can't keep going the way we have been. They fought valiantly but enough of them eventually caved. Incidently, the increased debt is what caused the lower credit rating so you are helping to prove my point.
On polls, it isn't so much the number of people polled as it is their political tendencies and the likeliness that they will vote. A poll skewed with more people from either party is likely to have the opposite result from a poll skewed towards the opposite party. A poll of people not likely to vote isn't very meaningful at all.
I think Fox appears more skewed than they really are because the rest of the media is Sooo left but even I acknowledge that their right side is dominant. They do however do a better job of giving the left a voice in my opinion. Usually the debates are one-on-one where the other networks have a token right vs a panal of several left. By the way, Fox's ratings are way ahead of the others so whatever they are doing, the public seems to be reacting favorably. Of course, it may be more due to the fact that Fox gets 100% of us conservatives where the liberals have dozens of networks to choose from.
The "lowest opinion of Congress" might have more to do with what they did than what they didn't do. Dozens of bankrupt companies like Solyndra, open border policies, Fast and Furious, Executive Orders and Cabinet Appointments in the dead of the night without due process, no budget for three years even though our Constitution mandates that there be one, passing Obamacare even though the majority of the US does not want it, blocking the Canadian Oil Pipeline...I could go on-and-on. However, when you speak of the low opinion of Congress, you have to realize that is a two-edged sword that cuts both ways. You can't tell me that there isn't also some dissatisfaction coming from the radical left that aren't happy that Gitmo is still open, that we still have troops in Afganistan, that we still show minor support for Isreal, etc.
On a seperate note...Bloomberg is reporting today that 79% of General Motors sales last month were to the US Government. What they don't report is whether they were purchased at a fair price. The US Gov't is obviously not getting bids so why should they be discounted?
Anyway, keep this in mind when Obama/Biden tout their role in the GM "turnaround".
On polls, it isn't so much the number of people polled as it is their political tendencies and the likeliness that they will vote. A poll skewed with more people from either party is likely to have the opposite result from a poll skewed towards the opposite party. A poll of people not likely to vote isn't very meaningful at all.
I think Fox appears more skewed than they really are because the rest of the media is Sooo left but even I acknowledge that their right side is dominant. They do however do a better job of giving the left a voice in my opinion. Usually the debates are one-on-one where the other networks have a token right vs a panal of several left. By the way, Fox's ratings are way ahead of the others so whatever they are doing, the public seems to be reacting favorably. Of course, it may be more due to the fact that Fox gets 100% of us conservatives where the liberals have dozens of networks to choose from.
The "lowest opinion of Congress" might have more to do with what they did than what they didn't do. Dozens of bankrupt companies like Solyndra, open border policies, Fast and Furious, Executive Orders and Cabinet Appointments in the dead of the night without due process, no budget for three years even though our Constitution mandates that there be one, passing Obamacare even though the majority of the US does not want it, blocking the Canadian Oil Pipeline...I could go on-and-on. However, when you speak of the low opinion of Congress, you have to realize that is a two-edged sword that cuts both ways. You can't tell me that there isn't also some dissatisfaction coming from the radical left that aren't happy that Gitmo is still open, that we still have troops in Afganistan, that we still show minor support for Isreal, etc.
On a seperate note...Bloomberg is reporting today that 79% of General Motors sales last month were to the US Government. What they don't report is whether they were purchased at a fair price. The US Gov't is obviously not getting bids so why should they be discounted?
Anyway, keep this in mind when Obama/Biden tout their role in the GM "turnaround".
Old Glory, you must have loved debating back in your High School days.
Old Glory, I heard that the Defense Department is getting ready to buy a whole bunch of GM Volts. Not sure if that is true. Anyway, so the tax payers "bail out" GM and in order to keep them a float the taxk payers have to buy the majority of their cars and trucks. The GM turn around is a farce.
Just confirmed that the defense department is buying 1500 Chevy Volts. What a joke. They want the military to be more Green. Can just see it now when our brave men and women in uniform have to stop to plug in thier volt to charge it. I am sure that electricity is no problem in a war zone. So the Government is going to spend $30K+ per volt to help prop up government motors who loses $49K on each volt sold. That makes the total somewhere around $79k per car since we essentially own GM. I would love for someone to investigate how this was "competetivley bid". Where are the Dems now? When GW was in offfice all we heard was how out military was not equiped properly. Well a $79K Volt will really help!
The way I look at a re-election bid is sort of like a job review. How have you done? Did you hit your key performance indicators and should we keep you on? If you had the record below would you expect to keep your job?
1. 23 million unemployed
2. 43 straight months of 8+% unemployment
3. 45 million on food stamps
4. African American poverty at record highs
5. 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty
6. The middle class has lost 40% of its net worth
7. Youth unemployment over 50%
8. Hispanic unemployment at 11.3%
9. Food prices up 15%
10. Gas prices doubled
11. The worst job creation record since 1945
12. Obama recovery the worst in 75 years
13. Median household income declined $4,300
14. Family health insurance up $1,500
15. Obama added $6 trillion to our debt…more than all previous administrations combined.
16. Only President to see a US credit downgrade
In full disclosure I did not compile the above facts.
1. 23 million unemployed
2. 43 straight months of 8+% unemployment
3. 45 million on food stamps
4. African American poverty at record highs
5. 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty
6. The middle class has lost 40% of its net worth
7. Youth unemployment over 50%
8. Hispanic unemployment at 11.3%
9. Food prices up 15%
10. Gas prices doubled
11. The worst job creation record since 1945
12. Obama recovery the worst in 75 years
13. Median household income declined $4,300
14. Family health insurance up $1,500
15. Obama added $6 trillion to our debt…more than all previous administrations combined.
16. Only President to see a US credit downgrade
In full disclosure I did not compile the above facts.
It is easy to list 16 reasons why you do not like the Obama administration but you give no thought as to why those reasons exist.
Do you really think there is anything that the Republicans or democrats could do about the price of fuel? The price of fuel in Canada and the rest of the world is much higher.
Do you really think the credit downgrade was caused solely by the Democrats?
Do you really think the Democrats are responsible for this years drought which has caused food prices to rise?
The tone of these blogs only reinforces my belief that American politics is very polarized and those who like to call themselves conservatives are anything but.
Do you really think there is anything that the Republicans or democrats could do about the price of fuel? The price of fuel in Canada and the rest of the world is much higher.
Do you really think the credit downgrade was caused solely by the Democrats?
Do you really think the Democrats are responsible for this years drought which has caused food prices to rise?
The tone of these blogs only reinforces my belief that American politics is very polarized and those who like to call themselves conservatives are anything but.
quote:Originally posted by Jrlz:
So the Government is going to spend $30K+ per volt to help prop up government motors who loses $49K on each volt sold.
In agreement with SSG, crazy things being thrown around here.
As a veteran, I think I can see through your claim that the military would be using the Chevy Volts actually IN a war. They obviously will be using them domestically.
As a consumer, I understand it costs X amount of money to develop a radically different new car and when you divide X by the number of cars that have already been sold instead of dividing it by all the cars sold in the life of the program (which is ongoing and unknowable at this time) you arrive at a crazy number (like $49,000 per car).
As an example, Toyota "lost" money on the Prius for the first few years because of the same factor, but once the number of cars sold reaches a high enough number, the formula works out and the Prius is now quite profitable.
The Government is buying US-made cars, that don't use (as much) foreign produced oil, cutting government expenditures and you are upset about it?
SSG,
I agree with you that the US Political scene is polarized. There is too much us versus them. Each side thinks their “guy” can do no wrong and the other side’s “guy” can do no right. I do not believe that the issues facing the US are the fault of just one political party. Poor leadership from both sides has created many issues. However, at a Federal level one party has been in control over congress and the white house during much of the latest round of problems. In addition, the state I live in has been under the control (Governor and House) of one party for many years.
I believe it is time for a change. In my opinion President Obama is in over his head. He lacks the background and skills to be a chief executive. He inherited problems, no argument there. However his policies are heading the country in the wrong direction. He is the Chief Executive of the US and with that job comes sole responsibility. Blaming problems on past administrations does no good, we need a leader who can fix things.
The biggest issue facing the US is unemployment. We need an administration that is business friendly and will stop creating uncertainty with the talk of tax increases, costly new regulations and the uncertainty of how Obama care will impact them. One party’s answer to every problem that faces us is a tax increase. Not sure about you, but everyone I have ever worked for was wealthy. How does taking more money from the wealthy help? You are taking money from the job creators. Steve Jobs, no conservative by any means, even told President Obama that the US Government was making it too hard for businesses. Here is another fact; we could confiscate all of the income from everyone earning more than 108,000 per year and it would fund the federal government for 10 months!
It is my opinion that we need a government that will operate leanly, get out of the way of business, stop spending more than we take in, stop sending our military all over the world, decrease the size of the Federal Government (we are after all a republic of UNITED STATES), and let the states handle everything that was not granted to the Federal Government in our Constitution. But maybe I am alone on that.
I agree with you that the US Political scene is polarized. There is too much us versus them. Each side thinks their “guy” can do no wrong and the other side’s “guy” can do no right. I do not believe that the issues facing the US are the fault of just one political party. Poor leadership from both sides has created many issues. However, at a Federal level one party has been in control over congress and the white house during much of the latest round of problems. In addition, the state I live in has been under the control (Governor and House) of one party for many years.
I believe it is time for a change. In my opinion President Obama is in over his head. He lacks the background and skills to be a chief executive. He inherited problems, no argument there. However his policies are heading the country in the wrong direction. He is the Chief Executive of the US and with that job comes sole responsibility. Blaming problems on past administrations does no good, we need a leader who can fix things.
The biggest issue facing the US is unemployment. We need an administration that is business friendly and will stop creating uncertainty with the talk of tax increases, costly new regulations and the uncertainty of how Obama care will impact them. One party’s answer to every problem that faces us is a tax increase. Not sure about you, but everyone I have ever worked for was wealthy. How does taking more money from the wealthy help? You are taking money from the job creators. Steve Jobs, no conservative by any means, even told President Obama that the US Government was making it too hard for businesses. Here is another fact; we could confiscate all of the income from everyone earning more than 108,000 per year and it would fund the federal government for 10 months!
It is my opinion that we need a government that will operate leanly, get out of the way of business, stop spending more than we take in, stop sending our military all over the world, decrease the size of the Federal Government (we are after all a republic of UNITED STATES), and let the states handle everything that was not granted to the Federal Government in our Constitution. But maybe I am alone on that.
quote:Originally posted by JasonR:
The Government is buying US-made cars, that don't use (as much) foreign produced oil, cutting government expenditures and you are upset about it?
Wow, I did some more searches on this and people (on right-wing websites) are going CRAZY over this calling it things like "the biggest scandal of the Obama Administration" and someone posted "since they lose $79k per car let's all go out and buy one and bankrupt them!"
So um... (I'm really askin' here) why would you make it your goal as a conservative American to bankrupt an American automobile manufacturer?
Seems to be somewhat contrary to your stated goals.
I personally think that we should have let GM go through Banckruptcy reorganization. I was against the Auto Bail out, which started at the tail end of the Bush Administration. I was against it then and am against it now. Free market economics makes businesses stronger not weaker. The government should not pick the "winners".
Jason, Let's not quote nameless radicals and then place their words in our mouths as if all conservatives share those views. There are full-fledged communists supporting the Democratic party that you wouldn't want equated to you.
I agree that it was wrong to associate Chevy Volt purchases with combat forces. However, Volts are not selling well because the high purchase price cannot be justified by the low operating cost, otherwise more people would be buying them. If it isn't cost effective for us, then it isn't for the US Government and we can't afford to continue to fund ideas only because they are "politically correct." On a side note, I don't understand what makes coal powered cars so politically correct to begin with. Obviously, I say coal powered because 71% of our electricity is derived from coal.
To SSG: I don't blame the cost of food on the Democrats although ethanol has been a major culprit over the years. I do blame the cost of gas on anyone who has interfered with domestic exploration in the past which can be blamed on the Democrats.
Also to SSG: Again with the unsubstantiated accusations..."those who like to call themselves conservatives are anything but." What about any of this do you believe is not a conservative issue?
To Jrlz: The Constitution is what has made us survive as a country this long. The further we get away from it, the closer we get to having the same problems the European Union is having.
I agree that it was wrong to associate Chevy Volt purchases with combat forces. However, Volts are not selling well because the high purchase price cannot be justified by the low operating cost, otherwise more people would be buying them. If it isn't cost effective for us, then it isn't for the US Government and we can't afford to continue to fund ideas only because they are "politically correct." On a side note, I don't understand what makes coal powered cars so politically correct to begin with. Obviously, I say coal powered because 71% of our electricity is derived from coal.
To SSG: I don't blame the cost of food on the Democrats although ethanol has been a major culprit over the years. I do blame the cost of gas on anyone who has interfered with domestic exploration in the past which can be blamed on the Democrats.
Also to SSG: Again with the unsubstantiated accusations..."those who like to call themselves conservatives are anything but." What about any of this do you believe is not a conservative issue?
To Jrlz: The Constitution is what has made us survive as a country this long. The further we get away from it, the closer we get to having the same problems the European Union is having.
Jason R, Good point on the Volt. It would help on lower our dependence on foreing oil. However, would not a hybrid from say Ford like a fusion not accomplish the same thing. To me it looks like the Federal Government just helping to prop up GM which they own a large piece of. The appearance of a conflict of interest is just too big. Another reason that the government should not own the means of production.
I agree Old Glory. Our constitution is what has kept us around for so long. Much of what the Federal Government has been doing over the last 100 years is not one of the powers that is entrusted to it.
I believe what you describe as Conservative, Wikipedia describes as:
Fiscal conservatism
Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt.[37] Edmund Burke, in his 'Reflections on the Revolution in France', argued that a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer:
What I describe as conservative is someone from the political center. Some of the opinions voiced on this forum are obviously far to the right of center.
On the Chevy Volt issue, GM admits they had to introduce breakthrough technology on this car to try and leap frog the Toyota Prius to maintain American high tech auto dominance. GM admits they cannot breakeven on this car as it is first generation technology. GM is optimistic that their next generation of electric cars will be profitable.
Like it or not, Obama saved Detroit and the USA auto industry with countless spin off American jobs.
Fiscal conservatism
Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt.[37] Edmund Burke, in his 'Reflections on the Revolution in France', argued that a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer:
What I describe as conservative is someone from the political center. Some of the opinions voiced on this forum are obviously far to the right of center.
On the Chevy Volt issue, GM admits they had to introduce breakthrough technology on this car to try and leap frog the Toyota Prius to maintain American high tech auto dominance. GM admits they cannot breakeven on this car as it is first generation technology. GM is optimistic that their next generation of electric cars will be profitable.
Like it or not, Obama saved Detroit and the USA auto industry with countless spin off American jobs.
Also, please correct my less than great understanding of the USA political system but does not the Republicans control Congress and the Democrats control the Senate?
Does not the Congress try and shoot down 95%+ of what the President proposes? and then does not the Congress pass motions that they know are crafted in a way that the Senate can only reject?
Does not the Congress try and shoot down 95%+ of what the President proposes? and then does not the Congress pass motions that they know are crafted in a way that the Senate can only reject?
A quick check of Wikipedia once again reveals that it was President Bush who signed into law
the Clean Energy Act of 2007 that launched the USA into an accelerated Ethanol production program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...Security_Act_of_2007
Five years later, I have read many sources that seem to think this was a well intentioned but misguided move for the USA.
Obviously, some people on this board believe in "Drill, Baby Drill!" despite the harsh lessons of the Gulf Oil disaster.
the Clean Energy Act of 2007 that launched the USA into an accelerated Ethanol production program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...Security_Act_of_2007
Five years later, I have read many sources that seem to think this was a well intentioned but misguided move for the USA.
Obviously, some people on this board believe in "Drill, Baby Drill!" despite the harsh lessons of the Gulf Oil disaster.
SSG,
Regarding, Obama saving the US auto industry. If we contend that the bailouts saved the Auto Industry, then some credit should go to President Bush who initiated the Auto Bailouts of GM and Chrysler in December 2007. More bailouts followed, but it was President Bush who started the process. . I would contend that the bailout was not the right thing to do; we should have let the free market work its process. Stronger companies are made through free market competition. Perhaps a new American Auto giant would have emerged . We will never know.
Currently the White House and Senate are controlled by the Democratic Party and the Congress is Republican Controlled. My comments were about the fact that for the first two years of Obama’s Administration the democrats controlled it all. What did they do to help turn things around with the economy? The only thing they did was ram through Obama care, without even reading the law. Nancy Pelosi famously said they would have to pass the bill so they could see what was in the bill.
For better or worse, Obama is the President. If we are going to heap praise on him when things go right, then he is equally responsible when things do not go right. The economy and employment are not going well. He is in charge, that is his responsibility and it is more than fair for voters to hold him accountable
Regarding, Obama saving the US auto industry. If we contend that the bailouts saved the Auto Industry, then some credit should go to President Bush who initiated the Auto Bailouts of GM and Chrysler in December 2007. More bailouts followed, but it was President Bush who started the process. . I would contend that the bailout was not the right thing to do; we should have let the free market work its process. Stronger companies are made through free market competition. Perhaps a new American Auto giant would have emerged . We will never know.
Currently the White House and Senate are controlled by the Democratic Party and the Congress is Republican Controlled. My comments were about the fact that for the first two years of Obama’s Administration the democrats controlled it all. What did they do to help turn things around with the economy? The only thing they did was ram through Obama care, without even reading the law. Nancy Pelosi famously said they would have to pass the bill so they could see what was in the bill.
For better or worse, Obama is the President. If we are going to heap praise on him when things go right, then he is equally responsible when things do not go right. The economy and employment are not going well. He is in charge, that is his responsibility and it is more than fair for voters to hold him accountable
quote:Originally posted by SalesServiceGuy:
I believe what you describe as Conservative, Wikipedia describes as:
Fiscal conservatism
What I describe as conservative is someone from the political center. Some of the opinions voiced on this forum are obviously far to the right of center.
The political center is most often called a moderate. I am definately conservative and I am far right from center. I am not only a fiscal conservative. I am a social conservative as well.
Obama didn't save Detroit, he saved the unions.
quote:Obama didn't save Detroit, he saved the unions.
Did not save the non unoin workers for GMs Delphi division though. They had thier pensions cut. Huh.
quote:Originally posted by SalesServiceGuy:
A quick check of Wikipedia once again reveals that it was President Bush who signed into law
the Clean Energy Act of 2007 that launched the USA into an accelerated Ethanol production program.
Obviously, some people on this board believe in "Drill, Baby Drill!" despite the harsh lessons of the Gulf Oil disaster.
It was actually the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 and although I do blame Bush (sorry I din't make that clear earlier) it passed with greater than a two-thirds majority so his veto would have been over-ridden anyway.
Regarding Drill Baby Drill...keep in mind that new wells are being built in the gulf all the time, they just aren't ours. Drill Baby Drill stands for much more than just deep water drilling in the Gulf. In the mountainous Green River Basin of the American West, running through Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming, the American people own lands containing an estimated one trillion barrels of oil, more than triple the amount of Saudi Arabia's proven oil reserves. Then, of course, there is the Keystone (Canadian) Pipeline.
quote:Originally posted by SalesServiceGuy:
Does not the Congress try and shoot down 95%+ of what the President proposes? and then does not the Congress pass motions that they know are crafted in a way that the Senate can only reject?
First of all, don't sell yourself short on your understanding of the US politica system. You have proven that you know more than probably 90% of the US.
It is interesting how you paint the Republicans in a negative light when they oppose the Democrats but say that the Democrats have no choice but to oppose the Republicans.
Is not the US political process set up in a way that a new bill has to be introduced in and approved by Congress, then pass through the Senate and be signed by the President before it can become law?
I was recently watching two interesting CNN biographies of both Obama and Romney that showed each person in a positive light. I learned a lot of good things about Romney.
But there was a point where Obama and Boehner were deadlocked on some big political issue. The two men eventually reached what was called the "Grand Bargin" and considered the deal done. A day or two later the deal fell though because Boehner could not get his own party to agree to the deal. It was blocked dead by the uncompromising TEA party.
The last two years have been gridlock and a dog fight between Congress and the Senate, all at a great disservice to the USA.
I was recently watching two interesting CNN biographies of both Obama and Romney that showed each person in a positive light. I learned a lot of good things about Romney.
But there was a point where Obama and Boehner were deadlocked on some big political issue. The two men eventually reached what was called the "Grand Bargin" and considered the deal done. A day or two later the deal fell though because Boehner could not get his own party to agree to the deal. It was blocked dead by the uncompromising TEA party.
The last two years have been gridlock and a dog fight between Congress and the Senate, all at a great disservice to the USA.