• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

World Politics

Page 389 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloCity said:
Because Obama is the only sane one in the entire field? I am as liberal as they come and would be very unlikely to vote Republican no matter who was running, but this field of Republicans - including the wholly incompetent Romney (you do know how he made his fortune, right? Buying companies, splitting them up, laying off thousands of workers, and then selling the bits and pieces - yeah, that'd be a great business model) - is simply insane, from Bachmann and Perry down to Herman Cain and Ron Paul. And while I've been disappointed with Obama - mainly because he hasn't gone far enough to the left and is still trying to play nice with Republicans who clearly don't give a s**t about the country and will do everything they can to sabotage his presidency - I will vote for him again, no question, if only because the alternative of the sheer f**king ignorance (and I mean that in the full sense of the word) of the Perry/Bachmann/Romney set scares the holy bejesus out of me.
Well, I feel for you then. I'm not sure why you can't connect the dots with what is happening with this economy. Then you have the European models falling left and right. It's painfully obvious that big government does not work with the possible exception of small populations with big natural resources. I mean, France just announced their new austerity plan...

Sabotaging a presidency? Do you think the efforts are more or less than the previous president was faced with? That's politics. Clinton faced it, Carter, Reagan, Bush... every president is opposed.

Part of our problem today is this idea that, since I have a different idea than you, somehow I don't give a sh*t about this country. Hopefully that's rhetoric on your part. I think our President cares for this Country. I just don't think his policies work and he's stuck enough in his ideology that he will not change course.
 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
VeloCity said:
Because Obama is the only sane one in the entire field? I am as liberal as they come and would be very unlikely to vote Republican no matter who was running, but this field of Republicans - including the wholly incompetent Romney (you do know how he made his fortune, right? Buying companies, splitting them up, laying off thousands of workers, and then selling the bits and pieces - yeah, that'd be a great business model) - is simply insane, from Bachmann and Perry down to Herman Cain and Ron Paul. And while I've been disappointed with Obama - mainly because he hasn't gone far enough to the left and is still trying to play nice with Republicans who clearly don't give a s**t about the country and will do everything they can to sabotage his presidency - I will vote for him again, no question, if only because the alternative of the sheer f**king ignorance (and I mean that in the full sense of the word) of the Perry/Bachmann/Romney set scares the holy bejesus out of me.
Completely agree with this post. At a time when Corporate profits are rising at roughly the same rate as true unemployment, the idea that anyone in government is big business unfriendly is laughable. The trouble with Obama is that he has turned out to be almost as middleclass unfriendly as the last mob was. He is still better than the bunch of crazies poised in the (right) wings.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cobblestones said:
You have to remember that during the heyday of the housing bubble, leverage was quite a bit higher than today. Deleveraging and unwinding has decreased the amount of money quite substantially, therefore creating a deflationary pressure. Hence quantitative easing 1 & 2 and probably soon 3. Look at yields of treasuries, still incredibly small despite the downgrade.

I agree on your point concerning actual price increase. Energy and in particular health insurance are still outpacing 'core' inflation. Something has to be done. But the solution to that problem isn't found in monetary policy.


As to the Republican field. How would anybody know what Romney stands for? He has flip flopped on so many occasions. Perry, Bachmann and Paul are obviously nuts. Leaving Romney out, the only sane person so far I've seen in this field is Huntsman (and that may be because he's not that much in the news).

Romney apparently uttered that he can emphasize with the unemployed, because he's currently 'unemployed' himself. All the while he's tearing down one of his (how many?) houses to replace it by a mansion 4 times its size. That's going to go down really well with voters here in the rust belt.

Perry is running away from his book which was published only 9 months ago. What does he stand for exactly? I don't think he knows it himself. He would need a Cheney to tell him.

The pundits are still hoping for more candidates entering the race, because they can see the deficiencies of the current crop.
Romney has a record. He'll be judged on it. He is known.

Yields on treasuries are down because there is tons of money buying US debt. Given what's happening all over the world where will the safe money continue to go? US Debt.

Perry won't get the nomination. You heard it here first.
 
Scott SoCal said:
I don't get it. You'd vote for Obama but have no idea what you are voting for. He proved himself to be incompetent and as you say has backed up on nearly everything he's campaigned on.

I can understand a no vote for Perry or Bachmann, but Romney?? He's not a Tea Party candidate, that's for damn sure. He has a record, it's pretty easy to see what he's for and what he's against and other than being a pro-business republican I don't see what your challenge would be if it came down to a choice between Obama and Romney.

We have seen what a business-hostile President can do. I don't think enough people will want 4 more years of economic misery to get Obama elected unless the repubs nominate Ron Paul or possibly Bachmann. My opinion.
Romney is a mormon, thus a crack-pot. And is there anything besides business you guys don't understand or desire in life?
 
May 13, 2009
3,042
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Romney has a record. He'll be judged on it. He is known.

Yields on treasuries are down because there is tons of money buying US debt. Given what's happening all over the world where will the safe money continue to go? US Debt.

Perry won't get the nomination. You heard it here first.
Yes he has a record, and he's running from it, not on it.


Anyway, to continue the economic discussion, you agree that US debt is sought after. Why not exploit this since money is so cheap to come by? Why not start a program, call it stimulus, infrastructure or whatnot where we fix our crumbling infrastructure, our schools, the education system in general etc and at the same time get people back to work? That would make sense. Money is cheap to come by, inflation worries are still not great. So, what's the holdup? Well, besides Cantor?

ETA: and I hope you're right wrt Perry. Btw. who do you predict to get the nomination?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
Romney is a mormon, thus a crack-pot. And is there anything besides business you guys don't understand or desire in life?
Sure. But I understand without a strong economy there is absolute chaos. A strong economy equals healthy business. It's important.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
A pro business republican is about as credible as a pro happiness democrat.
A democrat that says " I want everyone to be happy" is as empty as a republican that says "I want business to be less taxed and regulated". Anyone could say these things..There's no thought behind them..

We just need an "independent" to say " I want business to be less taxed and regulated and for everyone to be happy"

Lets just go Shopping...ooops didn't mean to quote

Have some beer

 
Scott SoCal said:
Sure. But I understand without a strong economy there is absolute chaos. A strong economy equals healthy business. It's important.
Yes, but I've had it. The stupidity! The inanity! The imbecility! The vacuousness! The utter and total ignorance! The baseness! The shallowness! The callousness! The effrontery! The backwardness!

It's enough to make one want to throw up!
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
""WASHINGTON -- Two weeks before Thanksgiving in 2003, top officials from Texas Governor Rick Perry's office pitched an unusual offer to the state's retired teachers: Let's get into the death business.

Perry's budget director, Mike Morrissey, laid out a pitch that was both ambitious and risky, according to notes summarizing the meeting provided to The Huffington Post.

According to the notes, which were authenticated by a meeting participant, the Perry administration wanted to help Wall Street investors gamble on how long retired Texas teachers would live. Perry was promising the state big money in exchange for helping Swiss banking giant UBS set up a business of teacher death speculation.

All they had to do was convince retirees to let UBS buy life insurance policies on them. When the retirees died, those policies would pay out benefits to Wall Street speculators, and the state, supposedly, would get paid for arranging the bets. The families of the deceased former teachers would get nothing""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/25/rick-perry-texas-life-insurance-scheme_n_935666.html

 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cobblestones said:
Yes he has a record, and he's running from it, not on it.


Anyway, to continue the economic discussion, you agree that US debt is sought after. Why not exploit this since money is so cheap to come by? Why not start a program, call it stimulus, infrastructure or whatnot where we fix our crumbling infrastructure, our schools, the education system in general etc and at the same time get people back to work? That would make sense. Money is cheap to come by, inflation worries are still not great. So, what's the holdup? Well, besides Cantor?

ETA: and I hope you're right wrt Perry. Btw. who do you predict to get the nomination?
Interest rates won't be low forever. That said I'd support stimulus if it were basic. Don't go with infrastructure, do something like a temporary federal income tax holiday for all taxable income under $100,000... or temporary payroll tax holiday. Put more money in people's hands right now.

I think Romney gets it. Perry will continue to gaff it up and that will kill him when it gets to crunch time. Bachmann is on the fringe and is only polling as well as she is because independents are so convinced that Obama is a disaster (and so far, they are correct). Huntsman is already done he knows it. If Perry were smart he'd figure out a way to recruit Rubio as a running mate. He does that and Obama's toast.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
Yes, but I've had it. The stupidity! The inanity! The imbecility! The vacuousness! The utter and total ignorance! The baseness! The shallowness! The callousness! The effrontery! The backwardness!

It's enough to make one want to throw up!
Welcome to the world as it is and not as you'd wish it to be.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Well, I feel for you then. I'm not sure why you can't connect the dots with what is happening with this economy.
Because I know how this economy got to be in the shape that it is in the first place, and I don't want those people anywhere near the reigns of power ever again.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Sure. But I understand without a strong economy there is absolute chaos. A strong economy equals healthy business. It's important.
We went from a strong economy under Clinton to the disaster we have now under Bush and the Republicans, and now you want to put the Republicans back into power in the hope that they will clean up their own mess???
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloCity said:
Because I know how this economy got to be in the shape that it is in the first place, and I don't want those people anywhere near the reigns of power ever again.
Ok. We won't agree on much. I appreciate you keeping it civil.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloCity said:
We went from a strong economy under Clinton to the disaster we have now under Bush and the Republicans, and now you want to put the Republicans back into power in the hope that they will clean up their own mess???
Why was the economy so successful under Clinton?

BTW, full disclosure, at the time I was appalled at the whole Lewinsky episode and I'm convinced Clinton committed purgery, but he was a very good president economically speaking. I wish he was running again.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
bwahhahaaaa bwahhahaaaa bwahhahaaaa bwahhahaaaa bwahhahaaaa
bwahhahaaaa
bwahhahaaaa
bwahhahaaaa
bwahhahaaaa

and let's rebuild that bridge that fell down in Minnesota

""
Following the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney called on the Libyan people to take up arms and revolt against the longtime dictator. Romney said the former dictator’s removal would make it easy for him to be removed.

This was Romney’s strongest statement yet on the Libyan uprising. He previously expressed support for U.S. involvement in Libya yet attacked President Barack Obama for doing so. In July, Romney criticized Obama’s policy on Libya and said the U.S. should not help remove Gaddafi from power.

At a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Thursday, Romney said changing events in Libya forced him to alter his position on the issue.

“I know I’ve said the U.S. shouldn’t support Gaddafi removal, but that was back when he was still in charge. The fact that he’s no longer in charge, well that changes everything,” Romney said. “I’m calling for his ouster and look, he’s already gone. That’s the kind of bold leadership you can expect from a Mitt Romney administration.”""
 
May 13, 2009
3,042
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Interest rates won't be low forever. That said I'd support stimulus if it were basic. Don't go with infrastructure, do something like a temporary federal income tax holiday for all taxable income under $100,000... or temporary payroll tax holiday. Put more money in people's hands right now.

I think Romney gets it. Perry will continue to gaff it up and that will kill him when it gets to crunch time. Bachmann is on the fringe and is only polling as well as she is because independents are so convinced that Obama is a disaster (and so far, they are correct). Huntsman is already done he knows it. If Perry were smart he'd figure out a way to recruit Rubio as a running mate. He does that and Obama's toast.
So you would support something like this?

As for the republican 'intelligentia(?)' Is there any reason why they don't fall behind Huntsman beside his low polling? I would assume that commentators like Krauthammer, Kristol, Frumm, Brooks, etc. could talk this guy up - out of the 1% range. If they could bring him up to 10-15%, maybe the rest of the media might latch on to the trend. Is there something about Huntsman which makes him unpalatable to those guys? It's pretty clear that they're not happy about any of the frontrunners, including Romney.

Rubio will not run as VP. How things are right now, the repub ticket will have the stench of defeat. Rubio'll sit it out until 2016 to run for the top of the ticket.

One more question. Scott, would you be happy with a Romney nomination. He'll be pro business, alright, but just like with everybody else, it will mean pro big business.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cobblestones said:
So you would support something like this?

As for the republican 'intelligentia(?)' Is there any reason why they don't fall behind Huntsman beside his low polling? I would assume that commentators like Krauthammer, Kristol, Frumm, Brooks, etc. could talk this guy up - out of the 1% range. If they could bring him up to 10-15%, maybe the rest of the media might latch on to the trend. Is there something about Huntsman which makes him unpalatable to those guys? It's pretty clear that they're not happy about any of the frontrunners, including Romney.

Rubio will not run as VP. How things are right now, the repub ticket will have the stench of defeat. Rubio'll sit it out until 2016 to run for the top of the ticket.

One more question. Scott, would you be happy with a Romney nomination. He'll be pro business, alright, but just like with everybody else, it will mean pro big business.

So you would support something like this?
The only reason I would oppose this would be to make the tax break bigger. I think this is gotcha politics (by the repubs) at it's absolute worst and just demonstrates how few elected officials give a hoot about anything other than winning.

I would assume that commentators like Krauthammer, Kristol, Frumm, Brooks, etc. could talk this guy up - out of the 1% range. If they could bring him up to 10-15%, maybe the rest of the media might latch on to the trend. Is there something about Huntsman which makes him unpalatable to those guys?
I think the 'inside the beltway' conservatives consider themselves king makers. They don't like Huntsman on at least a few levels. Probably the single biggest reason was Huntsman accepting the appointment by the Obama administration. But there's his position on global warming and he's a mormon, etc. So, he's going nowhere.

It's pretty clear that they're not happy about any of the frontrunners, including Romney
Yep. The King makers are begging Christie to run.

Rubio will not run as VP.
I agree. But he will be the President withing the next couple of cycles.

One more question. Scott, would you be happy with a Romney nomination. He'll be pro business, alright, but just like with everybody else, it will mean pro big business.
I'm not a big Romney fan. I'm having a hard time with the current crop of Repubs. I see Rubio as the real deal, a bit Reaganesque in his ability to communicate... but he's a bit young. Economically, I think Romney will be a better President than Obama, but he's trying to be on all sides of many issues which means he'll see which way the wind is blowing before making decisions. That's problematic as it suggests he's not all that firm with his principle beliefs.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Amsterhammer said:
Nice find, funny as sh!t!:D

Scott, weren't you going to elaborate on how different Perry is compared to the previous Texas Republican disaster?
Nope. Not real interested in discussing Perry if that's ok. If he gets the nomination then we can cover that ground. I don't think that's going to happen though.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Off Topic DIscussions 12
Similar threads
2019 Rugby World Cup

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts