• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

GOP 'Pledge' makes closing argument to voters

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Where does the money to fund the military come from?
At its earliest source, the Federal Mint. But keep saying that the government cannot create jobs. You should tell Utahbill that his time spent working at a nuclear power plant wasn't a job because government research started the whole industry. Since government cannot create jobs, that wasn't a job. lol. Keep pushing that line. It makes you look more and more absurd.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
At its earliest source, the Federal Mint. But keep saying that the government cannot create jobs. You should tell Utahbill that his time spent working at a nuclear power plant wasn't a job because government research started the whole industry. Since government cannot create jobs, that wasn't a job. lol. Keep pushing that line. It makes you look more and more absurd.
LMAO!!!...so, tax money has nothing to do with it?

The government gets 90+% of it's money from the private sector. You're a tax expert. You should already know that!
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The pic in the OP is a joke. There isn't enough makeup or man-tan to make those "Hill" bullies look sincere...
I'll give them this, tho. They sure know their audience. There are a lot of conservatives having little orgasms right now, too bad is it just mental masturbation.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The pic in the OP is a joke. There isn't enough makeup or man-tan to make those "Hill" bullies look sincere...
I'll give them this, tho. They sure know their audience. There are a lot of conservatives having little orgasms right now, too bad is it just mental masturbation.
So, left wihout and real argument, the Leftists fall back to racial slurs.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
So, left wihout and real argument, the Leftists fall back to racial slurs.
I suppose you can explain how my post was racist? How about your sig? Can you prove Michelle Obama said that? If not, it indicates an unreasonable hatred for the first lady, maybe even a little prejudice?
 

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I suppose you can explain how my post was racist? How about your sig? Can you prove Michelle Obama said that? If not, it indicates an unreasonable hatred for the first lady, maybe even a little prejudice?
Oh, it's like that sig somebody's wearing about loving boobs, allegedly stated by the Pope.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Your argument is still absurd as it argues that no one in the military has a job.
Really? So why doesn't President Obama just expand the Armed Forces with enough positions to cancel out unemployment.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Oh, it's like that sig somebody's wearing about loving boobs, allegedly stated by the Pope.
The pope has a dim view of boobs? Maybe he should get some glasses, and some testosterone shots.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
That's the usual tactic of Libbos. When Republicans are to blame, blame the Republicans. When the Democrats are to blame, blame everyone. Just like Katrina.
You mean like everything was Clinton's fault? remember we just got over 12 years of conservatives excuse Bush for every stupid thing he did.

However, the thing is, something this large is never done by one single person. Only a partisan idiot would argue that it has been. The deficit isn't new and didn't just start with Obama. And I distinctly remember hearing arguments by conservatives that the deficit didn't matter when Bush and republicans were spending like drunker saliors during the Bush years. Heck, even Reagan wasn't opposed to some deficit spending.

So, let's give credit where credit is due. Neither republcains or cemocrats will seriously tackle the deficit until they are forced to. This deficit problem didn't happen over night, and no magic will fix it. It will be difficult and long term, and it will require making both republicans and democrats unhappy. So, keep talking to your representatives demanding that they cut spending and increase taxes, . . . if you really care about the deficit that is. ;)
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
38,279
Reaction score
11,306
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You mean like everything was Clinton's fault? remember we just got over 12 years of conservatives excuse Bush for every stupid thing he did.

The people are awake now.


However, the thing is, something this large is never done by one single person. Only a partisan idiot would argue that it has been. The deficit isn't new and didn't just start with Obama. And I distinctly remember hearing arguments by conservatives that the deficit didn't matter when Bush and republicans were spending like drunker saliors during the Bush years. Heck, even Reagan wasn't opposed to some deficit spending.

Agreed, this is why repubs lost their hold on both houses in 2006, and the Presidency in 2008. But it sure didn't help demo's to instantly start lying to the American public.

So, let's give credit where credit is due. Neither republcains or cemocrats will seriously tackle the deficit until they are forced to. This deficit problem didn't happen over night, and no magic will fix it. It will be difficult and long term, and it will require making both republicans and democrats unhappy. So, keep talking to your representatives demanding that they cut spending and increase taxes, . . . if you really care about the deficit that is.
I think most people know that getting out of this is going to be painful, but they just don't want to make it worse as they go. Raising taxes in a depression like what we are in will do that.

j-mac
 

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The pope has a dim view of boobs? Maybe he should get some glasses, and some testosterone shots.
No, according to the sig, he <3 big boobs. :)
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
]You mean like everything was Clinton's fault? remember we just got over 12 years of conservatives excuse Bush for every stupid thing he did.


Find where I said it was, "all CLinton's fault", then get back to me.

However, the thing is, something this large is never done by one single person. Only a partisan idiot would argue that it has been. The deficit isn't new and didn't just start with Obama. And I distinctly remember hearing arguments by conservatives that the deficit didn't matter when Bush and republicans were spending like drunker saliors during the Bush years. Heck, even Reagan wasn't opposed to some deficit spending.
So, Obama is a partisan idiot? All we hear is how it's Bush's fault and about the, "failed policies of the past". He enver mentions the failing policies we have presently.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Find where I said it was, "all CLinton's fault", then get back to me.



So, Obama is a partisan idiot? All we hear is how it's Bush's fault and about the, "failed policies of the past". He enver mentions the failing policies we have presently.
Not sure I was speaking about just "you." But do you deny many argued it was Clinton fault all through the Bush presidency?

Obama is certainly partisan. And he is palying a partisan game. Nothing new in this. But he does require his audience to be non-thinking just as those trying to excuse Bush are. The deficit needed both republicans and democrats to grow to where it is now, and neither has done what is needed to reduce, and if they ever did, they would be booted out of office faster than they have lately. It is not politically viable to be fiscally repsonsible. Sadly.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Not sure I was speaking about just "you." But do you deny many argued it was Clinton fault all through the Bush presidency?
Some perhaps. I can't imagine that the prosperity during the Bush presidency was Clinton's fault.

Obama is certainly partisan. And he is palying a partisan game. Nothing new in this. But he does require his audience to be non-thinking just as those trying to excuse Bush are. The deficit needed both republicans and democrats to grow to where it is now, and neither has done what is needed to reduce, and if they ever did, they would be booted out of office faster than they have lately. It is not politically viable to be fiscally repsonsible. Sadly.
Over a trillion dollars in so called stimulus certainly didn't help. Killing jobs, with new legislation isn't going to help. Increasing taxes on an already depressed private sector is going to make things worse, not to mention what Obamacare is going to do. Now, tell us, who did all that? It wasn't the Republicans.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Some perhaps. I can't imagine that the prosperity during the Bush presidency was Clinton's fault.



Over a trillion dollars in so called stimulus certainly didn't help. Killing jobs, with new legislation isn't going to help. Increasing taxes on an already depressed private sector is going to make things worse, not to mention what Obamacare is going to do. Now, tell us, who did all that? It wasn't the Republicans.
There wasn't that much properity. Really, that is revisionist on your part.

As for helping, no it didn't help the deficit. But, are you arguing there were no other considerations? I would say much of it would have caused more problems had he not spent on the stimulus. In fact, he may not have spent enough. Deficit spending and stimulus spending, even bailouts are not new. A president who did nothing would face far more outrage than what Obama is now.

The rest of your complain is not supported by facts. There is no evidence tax increases kill jobs. Remember, we're under the tax cuts right now. Where are the jobs?
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,328
Reaction score
4,049
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
CORRECTION to my post (#231) where I stated:

"All four Acts were signed with a Republican House majority in Congress. (See last page of linked pdf document)"

Two Acts were signed with a Democrat House majority; two with a Republican House majority. So, except for which party the presiding President was affiliated with at the time the Acts were signed into law, both sides are equally at fault.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
There wasn't that much properity. Really, that is revisionist on your part.

As for helping, no it didn't help the deficit. But, are you arguing there were no other considerations? I would say much of it would have caused more problems had he not spent on the stimulus. In fact, he may not have spent enough. Deficit spending and stimulus spending, even bailouts are not new. A president who did nothing would face far more outrage than what Obama is now.

The rest of your complain is not supported by facts. There is no evidence tax increases kill jobs. Remember, we're under the tax cuts right now. Where are the jobs?
Wait another year, or so. There'll be mountains of evidence for you.

Did you ever wonder why the economy took off after WW2? Was it because of the war, or bcause of the massive tax cuts following the war.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Wait another year, or so. There'll be mountains of evidence for you.

Did you ever wonder why the economy took off after WW2? Was it because of the war, or bcause of the massive tax cuts following the war.
Or the spending produced by government putting money in at the bottom. Again, historically we can see that the economy has done well with a high tax rate and with a low tax rate, and everything combination in between. There is no evidence that taxes control the economy. Remeber, we have tax cuts right now, and just how is the economy doing?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Or the spending produced by government putting money in at the bottom. Again, historically we can see that the economy has done well with a high tax rate and with a low tax rate, and everything combination in between. There is no evidence that taxes control the economy. Remeber, we have tax cuts right now, and just how is the economy doing?
The government put money in at the bottom for ten years. It was called, "The Great Depression". The top tax rate was raised to 79% in 1936. Does it appear that that help things? Then, came along the tax cuts after WW2 and the economy boomed. gee, let's see!!
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The government put money in at the bottom for ten years. It was called, "The Great Depression". The top tax rate was raised to 79% in 1936. Does it appear that that help things? Then, came along the tax cuts after WW2 and the economy boomed. gee, let's see!!
You're making a leap. Look at causal relationship error fallacy. You can't reason something out in this manner.

try reading some history:

Labor, farms, mines, factories, trading houses, investment firms, communications — even cultural and educational institutions — were enlisted into the war effort. The nation accumulated big money and generated huge new industries to mass produce planes, ships, armored vehicles and numerous other items. Major population shifts occurred as people headed to new jobs.

The draft helped bring the armed forces of the United States to more than 15 million members. Approximately 65 million men and women were in uniform or worked in war-related jobs by the end of 1943.

Massive unemployment became a thing of the past and the Great Depression was swallowed up in the worldwide effort to defeat the Axis powers of Japan, Germany and Italy.

The Great Depression

And you might avoid conservative revisionist history. ;)
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
You're making a leap. Look at causal relationship error fallacy. You can't reason something out in this manner.

try reading some history:

Labor, farms, mines, factories, trading houses, investment firms, communications — even cultural and educational institutions — were enlisted into the war effort. The nation accumulated big money and generated huge new industries to mass produce planes, ships, armored vehicles and numerous other items. Major population shifts occurred as people headed to new jobs.

The draft helped bring the armed forces of the United States to more than 15 million members. Approximately 65 million men and women were in uniform or worked in war-related jobs by the end of 1943.

Massive unemployment became a thing of the past and the Great Depression was swallowed up in the worldwide effort to defeat the Axis powers of Japan, Germany and Italy.

The Great Depression

And you might avoid conservative revisionist history. ;)
The depression didn't end, until after the war.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The depression didn't end, until after the war.
Yes, I know. And while I understand you don't understand how things take time and think it happens instantly, another fallacious logic, you really should read more history. ;)
 
Top Bottom