It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:54 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:33 am 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
Displaced Fan wrote:
I for one would have voted for Huntsman in a heart beat but sadly I was left with Obama and Romney.

that would have been nice. a guy that didn't campaign negatively. a republican with foreign diplomacy skills. one who believed that climate change was a problem and that all the oil left in the world wasn't going to solve the issues we have. sad he got pushed to the side because he wasn't a loud mouthed ass.


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:22 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7475
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
I already said what my idea for making those programs affordable is. There really isn't any way other than to make healthcare part of the public good and having the government control it.

Ok, great. Democrats had 2 years, the White house and both houses of congress focused only on that issue and completely fucked it up.
Good show, but it's not happening. You need another idea.
Squanto wrote:
It's funny to see the simpletons arguing about these secession petitions on the White House website, and trying to decide that they actually mean anything.

That web site has been full of retarded derp since day 1.
I like how there's now a petition to deport everyone who signed a succession petition. Idiots abound.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:25 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
PatGreen wrote:
ironyisadeadscene wrote:
your going to see a much different, more moderate, GOP in 4 years. the social issues will be much less focused on, and theyll be more about fiscal conservationism. IMO.

same sex marriage, and abortion wont be pushed as much.

this should have been the case anyways. this is so many people want their state to secede. it's not fair for an entire country to be divided on issues that the government was never designed to regulate. all of these social issues that are a total waste of federal resources and an abuse of federal power should be designated to states in their entirety. marijuana, abortion, gay marriage, etc. everything. it does NOT belong at the federal level. it is dividing a country and creating hatred and mistrust and everything that spells anarchy between states and people based on goddamn lines on an electoral votes map.

it's not fair for anyone to have the middle 2/3s (land wise) of a country all believe one thing and the coasts believe the other. i understand that the popular vote and electoral are to ensure that it is a popular opinion. but with such polarized beliefs it is not healthy with this system.

few people would have issues with republicans if they were to abandon social issues. you would still have the original republican ideals that have since become libertarian - pertaining to defense and fiscal issues. you would still have democrats with their social programs.

the parties would still be different but they would NOT be as polarized. think of how many people (myself typically included) that are socially liberal but otherwise fairly conservative. i have to hate every candidate that ever has a chance to win the office.

i know people will be upset if states get to regulate social issues because then they still feel like someone else is in charge of their bodies, civil rights, whatever. here's the deal. you can choose what state to live in. i'm sick of hearing comparisons of gay marriage and right to choose to slavery. it's not the same, it will never be the same. when the north got rid of slavery....the slaves escaped or moved to the north. then when things cooled off, they went where they wanted to be. no, it's not fair to them. but it's not fair to the millions opposed in a region that people with completely different cultures want to change them. this is all a game of give and take...a marathon. all we see now is that everyone is sprinting to take. it's never going to work.

things won't change overnight. no one should be shoving their shit down the opposed throats. change takes time. if this power were granted to the state, i would imagine that a huge chunk of states would start allowing those things within their borders. then it's a bleeding effect.

I haven't studied europe, but i'm sure alex can comment since i know he's only reading political stuff anymore- but i highly, highly doubt that everyone in each respective country immediately all of these movements at once. it's also fair to point out that the size of our country and historic geographic distribution of wealth dictates that we'd have several very distinct cultures at once. those small european countries that everyone uses as a model are equivalent to getting mass, ny, nj, and ri on the same page. it's not that difficult.

Making a country work is not about polarity it's about working together. Not just the government. All special interest groups. Every. Single. One.


please, for the love of God, do not tell me I hate gays, that I don't get it because i'm an entitled heterosexual white man, or anything like that. it's bullshit.

Good post Pat. One thing I'd really like to point out in regards to social issues though is that "majority rule" was never intended to be the be-all, end-all of our political system. The Constitution was designed to have majority rule, but with minority rights protected. Laws can be declared unconstitutional. Thus the idea that we should "let the states decide" on issues (as much as I might like it in some cases, and conservatives might like it in others) doesn't really jive with the system we have. States would almost have to secede to get the scenario you're talking about.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:30 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Crosscheck wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
I already said what my idea for making those programs affordable is. There really isn't any way other than to make healthcare part of the public good and having the government control it.

Ok, great. Democrats had 2 years, the White house and both houses of congress focused only on that issue and completely fucked it up.
Good show, but it's not happening. You need another idea.

Oh, so I didn't realize you only get one shot at things, and you have to abandon the idea if it doesn't fly. So after women didn't get the vote the first time, they had to give up and get a new idea right? Plessy vs. Ferguson was the final word on school segregation eh? Separate but equal forever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:32 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
I'm pretty sure that states only have to enforce (at the minimum) federal law and regulations. if they want more broad or strict nuances after that, it's their prerogative.

i get where you're going, but a lot of the unconstitutional fights would probably be nil if this were to happen. everyone would be happier because they would feel represented rather than alienated.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:39 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Can't the majority in your individual states just become more insular and end up oppressing people and you end up with 50 mini-versions of the national situation? I heard your "you can just move to another state" point, and I did. However, I'm pretty sure that even though I'm far from affluent, I grew up with advantages a lot of people don't have. Saying "just move to another state" definitely does come from a position of privilege.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:48 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
I'll take on another of your points in your big post too, your idea that there are different cultures within the country itself. Well, let's say you are from the center of the country and you're gay. According to you, our hypothetical person should have to abandon his or her home, family, and culture all just to obtain rights and recognition that would be available to them elsewhere. That's some bullshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:57 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
And I'll gonna keep hammering at this Pat. The middle of the country believes something else eh? Well, do you honestly think there are fewer homosexuals there? Do you think they chose whether or not they are? I don't. 5% of the population is gay whether they were born in California or Kansas. But you think they should have different rights depending on where they're born? I don't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:02 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
no, i don't and this last string of crap is exactly why nothing good will ever happen. both sides want to fight and argue. no sacrifices for anything. it seems that the real point to my post has totally been ignored.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:17 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
PatGreen wrote:
no, i don't and this last string of crap is exactly why nothing good will ever happen. both sides want to fight and argue. no sacrifices for anything. it seems that the real point to my post has totally been ignored.

No, I'm pointing out the flaws in your plan of state-by-state laws.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:19 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
People need to come together, and the Republicans need to abandon social issues was the first part of your point. But then you mixed it in with Red state vs. blue state and state vs. federal law. Two different issues IMO. I agree with your first point, but see problems with your second.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:23 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
of course there are some problems. it's not a 150 page report on how to run a country.


Top
 Profile  
 
NYIntensity
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:27 pm 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 4463
Is anyone besides me simply tickled pink that he wasted a ton of other peoples' money?

_________________
ksquier89 wrote:
Holy fucking fuck...Boyes couldn't suck a dick if it landed in his mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:28 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
PatGreen wrote:
of course there are some problems. it's not a 150 page report on how to run a country.

Well, it's no easy question. I don't think you can try to compartmentalize social issues though and leave them to the states, because it goes against the character of our government. And I don't think you'll ever get a lot of gay people willing to compromise on the subject of gay marriage because it's too important to them.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:31 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
NYIntensity wrote:
Is anyone besides me simply tickled pink that he wasted a ton of other peoples' money?

Yes, but where did that money go? I was thinking about this the other day, how the campaign is pretty much another government stimulus every four years. But then I realized pretty much all of that money is going straight to the media conglomerates. Fail.


Top
 Profile  
 
NYIntensity
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:43 pm 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 4463
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
People need to come together, and the Republicans need to abandon social issues was the first part of your point. But then you mixed it in with Red state vs. blue state and state vs. federal law. Two different issues IMO. I agree with your first point, but see problems with your second.


So the republicans need to abandon social issues...why? So you can have your way, because you deem it the "proper" stance?

_________________
ksquier89 wrote:
Holy fucking fuck...Boyes couldn't suck a dick if it landed in his mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
NYIntensity
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:43 pm 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 4463
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
NYIntensity wrote:
Is anyone besides me simply tickled pink that he wasted a ton of other peoples' money?

Yes, but where did that money go? I was thinking about this the other day, how the campaign is pretty much another government stimulus every four years. But then I realized pretty much all of that money is going straight to the media conglomerates. Fail.


I don't care that it went to media. It left the pockets of assholes.

_________________
ksquier89 wrote:
Holy fucking fuck...Boyes couldn't suck a dick if it landed in his mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:49 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
NYIntensity wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
People need to come together, and the Republicans need to abandon social issues was the first part of your point. But then you mixed it in with Red state vs. blue state and state vs. federal law. Two different issues IMO. I agree with your first point, but see problems with your second.


So the republicans need to abandon social issues...why? So you can have your way, because you deem it the "proper" stance?

I'm summarizing Pat's big post, not my words. If it were me saying that then yes, because I'm right and they're wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
YankeeInRaleigh
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:51 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:58 pm
Posts: 2631
Location: Take a guess...
NYIntensity wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
People need to come together, and the Republicans need to abandon social issues was the first part of your point. But then you mixed it in with Red state vs. blue state and state vs. federal law. Two different issues IMO. I agree with your first point, but see problems with your second.


So the republicans need to abandon social issues...why? So you can have your way, because you deem it the "proper" stance?



Probably because as we just witnessed they get KILLED when they keep spouting off about which rapes and pregnancies god thinks are just swell. Their ultra conservative social views will not win them general elections, which is why I totally disagree with Pat and Stuuuu and think the republicans should keep beating the same drum. Who knows, maybe in 2016 women will want to be told to 'lie back and enjoy it.'


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:51 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
it wasn't just supposed to be republicans, it just read that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron