• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Champion of the poor

ocean515 said:
I'm sorry you had trouble reading my post. It appeared very clear. I checked, and it is very clear. Perhaps the clarity confused you.

The key is the sentence that starts with "These 10's of millions..."
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I should change from millions to 10 of millions but the rest of my comment applies.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
So, it's all about party line with you?
Click to expand...

What party?

The only party I belong to is the Liberal Party of Canada.

Now how about we actually discuss the issues instead of kid games....how about once an Obama head face that nasty little issue of Obama and lies.....

Lies and lies and lies......
 
"Last week, President Obama headlined a $100,000-a-plate fundraiser at the swank Jefferson Hotel in downtown Washington on behalf of the Democratic Party's Senate campaign arm."

stickyobamam1.webp

youze****inguize....

:lamo
 
Fearandloathing said:
What party?

The only party I belong to is the Liberal Party of Canada.

Now how about we actually discuss the issues instead of kid games....how about once an Obama head face that nasty little issue of Obama and lies.....

Lies and lies and lies......
Click to expand...

Not all liberals agree with Obama. If you want to talk about him, start your own thread.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Not all liberals agree with Obama. If you want to talk about him, start your own thread.
Click to expand...

Would you say things are better or worse in Wisconsin since Walker took over? Is unemployment up or down? Are wages up or down? Can low income employees keep more of their income or less?

Theres going to be lots of people spinning the facts but if you want to question 'the man' and his motives you probably should query his actual record.

And...just out of curiosity...why is it that you ran with the Romney comparisons yourself, but suddenly get all twitchy when someone brings up Obama?
 
Fearandloathing said:
Yes, but the way they address social issues is identical to the socialist part in Canada, the NDP. They would see a solution in providing two years of unemployment insurance as good.

Their programs are elaborate and stupid, and always couched in deceitful terms...."affordable care ...."
Click to expand...

To be honest I would have more respect for them if they did adopt the idea of public ownership of the means of production, it would solve most of their other objectives (If it worked). It is like having the ACA without a public option. It only creates more problems than it solves.
 
TeleKat said:
If there's one thing worse than economic capitaists, it's economic capitalists that claim they are fighting for the poor.
Click to expand...

I disagree. People that think giving away other peoples money is helping and caring are... scum of the earth.
 
VanceMack said:
Would you say things are better or worse in Wisconsin since Walker took over? Is unemployment up or down? Are wages up or down? Can low income employees keep more of their income or less?

Theres going to be lots of people spinning the facts but if you want to question 'the man' and his motives you probably should query his actual record.

And...just out of curiosity...why is it that you ran with the Romney comparisons yourself, but suddenly get all twitchy when someone brings up Obama?
Click to expand...

I vote things are worse in Wisconsin. The thread is about Walker and it pertains to his jarred response to Romney's comment. It has nothing to do with Obama.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Not all liberals agree with Obama. If you want to talk about him, start your own thread.
Click to expand...

really?

So I can't talk about Obama in a thread about US politics?

Please see the rest of the posts in here and lose the attitude. Because you go owned is no reason to be childish.
 
MrVicchio said:
I disagree. People that think giving away other peoples money is helping and caring are... scum of the earth.
Click to expand...

True, but economic capitalists that claim they are fighting for the poor is just as ridiculous.
 
blaxshep said:
True, but economic capitalists that claim they are fighting for the poor is just as ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Its all relative. Feed a man a fish / teach him to fish debate.


Inm a teach him to fish kinda guy myself.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
I vote things are worse in Wisconsin. The thread is about Walker and it pertains to his jarred response to Romney's comment. It has nothing to do with Obama.
Click to expand...
On what do you make the determination that things are 'worse' under Walker? We know (thanks to a failed hit piece) that more union and teacher jobs were lost under his predecessor than Walker. We know unemployment rates are down. We know income rates are up and that taxes are down. Per capita income is up. There are increases in new business startups and increases in private sector employment.

Im sure everyone presents facts how they want them to be seen...so, what are the source of your facts? Is unemployment in fact up under Walker?
 
Fearandloathing said:
really?

So I can't talk about Obama in a thread about US politics?

Please see the rest of the posts in here and lose the attitude. Because you go owned is no reason to be childish.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can talk about him, only this thread has nothing to do with him. You are the one acting childish btw.
 
VanceMack said:
On what do you make the determination that things are 'worse' under Walker? We know (thanks to a failed hit piece) that more union and teacher jobs were lost under his predecessor than Walker. We know unemployment rates are down. We know income rates are up and that taxes are down. Per capita income is up. There are increases in new business startups and increases in private sector employment.

Im sure everyone presents facts how they want them to be seen...so, what are the source of your facts? Is unemployment in fact up under Walker?
Click to expand...


Failed hit piece? Education policy is critically for a state. High paying jobs are either going to be where there are a lot of resources or where there is a highly educated workforce. His education policies are not moving the state forward. Most of the jobs that Wisconsin has gained has been low paying ones. They have lost a lot of middle income jobs in the past decade. This can't entirely be laid at his feet. That trend is nationwide. The policies that Obama and Congress have pushed, as far as trade and educational, have and will continue to come back and haunt us. Those policies have been many of the same that the Republican party hold dear which is market fundamentalist only on the spectrum the Republican party is more extreme than the Democratic party. Both parties are taking us in a bad direction. The only difference between either party is one will advocate keeping some of our social safety nets. Other than that, it's hard to tell them apart.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
I agree, it seems funny. I was reading up on the compassionate conservative concept. Basically, they feel for the poor and their dependency on government, and the remedy is to cut those ties with social programs and replace them with a marketplace approach. [As if a poor person can shop for privatized services]. With that little problem aside, Walker demonstrated this beautifully when he refused federal funds to expand Medicaid for the poor. He felt they would be better served shopping for private insurance [money issues aside] through the state's private insurers. It really doesn't matter that many couldn't afford those plans so they now go without insurance. I feel that sums up compassion.
Click to expand...

I agree, :shrug:

Welfare has a bad impact on people. If it can be minimized or even cut off, then it should be.

The only welfare I wouldn't mind staying is that which gives people the most basic of sustenance, food and water.

Obamaphones? No. Section 8 housing? **** no. And the list goes on.
 
Luftwaffe said:
I agree, :shrug:

Welfare has a bad impact on people. If it can be minimized or even cut off, then it should be.

The only welfare I wouldn't mind staying is that which gives people the most basic of sustenance, food and water.

Obamaphones? No. Section 8 housing? **** no. And the list goes on.
Click to expand...

So, you think the remedy is market based approach?
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Failed hit piece? Education policy is critically for a state. High paying jobs are either going to be where there are a lot of resources or where there is a highly educated workforce. His education policies are not moving the state forward. Most of the jobs that Wisconsin has gained has been low paying ones. They have lost a lot of middle income jobs in the past decade. This can't entirely be laid at his feet. That trend is nationwide. The policies that Obama and Congress have pushed, as far as trade and educational, have and will continue to come back and haunt us. Those policies have been many of the same that the Republican party hold dear which is market fundamentalist only on the spectrum the Republican party is more extreme than the Democratic party. Both parties are taking us in a bad direction. The only difference between either party is one will advocate keeping some of our social safety nets. Other than that, it's hard to tell them apart.
Click to expand...
Actually...the failed hit piece indicted Walker for jobs loss. With egg on their face, they had to admit the numbers they cited was for the democrat governor...not Walker.
"NYT Columnist Blames Scott Walker for Teacher Layoffs That Occurred Before He Was Governor"
NYT Columnist Blames Scott Walker for Teacher Layoffs That Occurred Before He Was Governor | The Weekly Standard

See...that kind of stuff is going to happen when all you see is what you want to see.

And there you go...talking about Obama. So...I get the drill. Pointing out Obamas deficit actions...bad. Bringing Obama into the mix to tout his praises...gooooood.

I have to admit. When I first saw Scott Walker talking about a presidential run I was like...meh...whatever. But turns out...he scares the piss out of you...doesnt he?
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
So, you think the remedy is market based approach?
Click to expand...

If market based approach = they don't get handouts then sure.

At the end of the day people will find work, no matter how little it is. But to give handouts will do nothing but give the incentive not to work.

Welfare is stupid.
 
Luftwaffe said:
If market based approach = they don't get handouts then sure.

At the end of the day people will find work, no matter how little it is. But to give handouts will do nothing but give the incentive not to work.

Welfare is stupid.
Click to expand...

Case and point I have a neighbor that was on unemployment. For 2 years not a job to be found. When unemployment ran out within 2 weeks he was waking up with me and going to work. Funny how that turned out huh?
 
VanceMack said:
Actually...the failed hit piece indicted Walker for jobs loss. With egg on their face, they had to admit the numbers they cited was for the democrat governor...not Walker.
"NYT Columnist Blames Scott Walker for Teacher Layoffs That Occurred Before He Was Governor"
NYT Columnist Blames Scott Walker for Teacher Layoffs That Occurred Before He Was Governor | The Weekly Standard

See...that kind of stuff is going to happen when all you see is what you want to see.

And there you go...talking about Obama. So...I get the drill. Pointing out Obamas deficit actions...bad. Bringing Obama into the mix to tout his praises...gooooood.

I have to admit. When I first saw Scott Walker talking about a presidential run I was like...meh...whatever. But turns out...he scares the piss out of you...doesnt he?
Click to expand...
Obama was relevant to my comments and it has nothing with being bad/good. Walker does not scare me. I'm curious how he will strategize his position. Will he stick with the poor or not. Should be interesting to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom