• 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!

How can we expect a bipartisan Congress?

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
We can't even be bipartisan on DP. The Republicans aren't 100% wrong. The Democrats aren't 100% wrong. I've been around just a short time and have seen a number of fair-minded posters....but the it seems the majority of posters are . . .

If Conservative, Obama hasn't done a thing right since he entered office.

If Liberal, it's alllll GWB's fault. Obama's done nothing wrong.

If Libertarian, it's everybody's fault.

Does it hurt a poster's ability to debate/influence others if he/she is so absolute? Is anything in politics that absolute?

Anybody have any thoughts?
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Nah, libertarians have been bi partisan till the recent crises. Now when the government tries to fix regulatory issues or employment matters libertarians are all over the democrats. Libertarians are the source of deregulation and tax cuts.(which have increased the US debt) Even further can be said to have influenced the privatisation of military affairs as well as top secret intelligence gathering. Libertarianism is the infection in the republican/democratic parties and even worse in society. In my opinion American society has gone to far right of center with fiscal libertarian ideals. In my opinion it is time for a change of frame of mind that brings society back from the abyss.Republicans have recently decided to take the whole libertarian pile of crap dispite having been disastrous for the economy.

Libertarian fiscal policy has been bi partisan and it is the cause of the mess America is in economically.
 
Last edited:

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Nah, libertarians have been bi partisan till the recent crises. Now when the government tries to fix regulatory issues or employment matters libertarians are all over the democrats. Libertarians are the source of deregulation and tax cuts.(which have increased the US debt) Even further can be said to have influenced the privatisation of military affairs as well as top secret intelligence gathering. Libertarianism is the infection in the republican/democratic parties and even worse in society. In my opinion American society has gone to far right of center with fiscal libertarian ideals. In my opinion it is time for a change of frame of mind that brings society back from the abyss.Republicans have recently decided to take the whole libertarian pile of crap dispite having been disastrous for the economy.

Libertarian fiscal policy has been bi partisan and it is the cause of the mess America is in economically.

Soooo!! It's the Libertarian's fault.....why didn't I think of that!
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
!! Sooooo, it's the Libertarian's fault! Why didn't I think of that!!

heh, well anti intervention/regulation, tax cuts, privatisation etc.. I don't know why you haven't thought of it.
 

other

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
1,473
Reaction score
587
Location
VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
These days, "bipartisan" is just a buzz word politicians use to try to legitimize their agendas to the American people where they would not otherwise be accepted. I'm generally against the idea and so don't want or expect a bipartisan congress. I want congressmembers that represent the will of their districts and actually hold to their oaths to uphold the Constitution, that's all. I'm absolutely fine with a partisan congress that argues too much to get much of anything done, that's the way it was designed to be.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
These days, "bipartisan" is just a buzz word politicians use to try to legitimize their agendas to the American people where they would not otherwise be accepted. I'm generally against the idea and so don't want or expect a bipartisan congress. I want congressmembers that represent the will of their districts and actually hold to their oaths to uphold the Constitution, that's all. I'm absolutely fine with a partisan congress that argues too much to get much of anything done, that's the way it was designed to be.

I prefer pragmatic myself. I don't like extremes like socialism or libertarianism.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
These days, "bipartisan" is just a buzz word politicians use to try to legitimize their agendas to the American people where they would not otherwise be accepted. I'm generally against the idea and so don't want or expect a bipartisan congress. I want congressmembers that represent the will of their districts and actually hold to their oaths to uphold the Constitution, that's all. I'm absolutely fine with a partisan congress that argues too much to get much of anything done, that's the way it was designed to be.

You're right about it being the word du jour. I look at sooooo many votes on the congressional floor and see almost 100% partisan voting. That's what I mean. Dems 99% for; Reps 99% against. That kind of thing. Surely serving the will of one's district doesn't mean voting down party lines all the time...

I also agree that's the way it's supposed to be. If everybody's agreeing, watch your back. ;-)
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,235
Reaction score
14,250
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Personally, I don't want a bi-partisan congress. I think the Democrats and Republicans both have good ideas that don't need either party watering them down.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Personally, I don't want a bi-partisan congress. I think the Democrats and Republicans both have good ideas that don't need either party watering them down.

How 'bout a little less partisan, then? Either one party or the other is going to have a majority in any given year. That shouldn't mean that the majority always gets their way. Our reps should be voting for what makes sense rather than down party lines.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Nah, libertarians have been bi partisan till the recent crises. Now when the government tries to fix regulatory issues or employment matters libertarians are all over the democrats. Libertarians are the source of deregulation and tax cuts.(which have increased the US debt) Even further can be said to have influenced the privatisation of military affairs as well as top secret intelligence gathering. Libertarianism is the infection in the republican/democratic parties and even worse in society. In my opinion American society has gone to far right of center with fiscal libertarian ideals. In my opinion it is time for a change of frame of mind that brings society back from the abyss.Republicans have recently decided to take the whole libertarian pile of crap dispite having been disastrous for the economy.

Libertarian fiscal policy has been bi partisan and it is the cause of the mess America is in economically.

Man, I've already lightly smacked you around in another thread for your blatant lie blaming libertarians for everything, do I really have to go all the way and finish you off?
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Man, I've already lightly smacked you around in another thread for your blatant lie blaming libertarians for everything, do I really have to go all the way and finish you off?

Huh? dear lord some variety of revisionist history? Oh boy you scare me.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Huh? dear lord some variety of revisionist history? Oh boy you scare me.

Not at all, you keep making explicitly incorrect statements attributing a libertarian economic system to the one that has existed over the past several years.

You fail from the onset.
You do not understand uniform deregulation, nor that a reduction in taxes must accompany a reduction in spending but you're pleased enough to call that "libertarianism."

Lousy research, lousy assumptions, lousy conclusions.
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We can't even be bipartisan on DP. The Republicans aren't 100% wrong. The Democrats aren't 100% wrong. I've been around just a short time and have seen a number of fair-minded posters....but the it seems the majority of posters are . . .

If Conservative, Obama hasn't done a thing right since he entered office.

If Liberal, it's alllll GWB's fault. Obama's done nothing wrong.

If Libertarian, it's everybody's fault.

Does it hurt a poster's ability to debate/influence others if he/she is so absolute? Is anything in politics that absolute?

Anybody have any thoughts?

Absolutism is a near always a failure in debate or politics. Unfortunately, it's the absolutists who have the loudest voices.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Not at all, you keep making explicitly incorrect statements attributing a libertarian economic system to the one that has existed over the past several years.

You fail from the onset.
You do not understand uniform deregulation, nor that a reduction in taxes must accompany a reduction in spending but you're pleased enough to call that "libertarianism."

Lousy research, lousy assumptions, lousy conclusions.

Oh it would be great if you could show me just where that was? I understand you don't like someone to gore your holy cow. Just get over it I don't care if you don't like my disdain for libertarianism. I didn't find your argument overwhelming or anything of the sort. Cutting taxes, deregulation, privatization are major policies the libertarian right wing fiscal policy. It doesn't matter you didn't achieve your pure utopian libertarian free market madness. It's a dam good thing you haven't managed it. You can pretend all you like these policies were not actively pursued.

But truly if you were elected as the president was in 2008.. what would you do? This is where it gets fun talking to libertarians when the actual wacky ideological political objectives have to be at least imagined. Really deregulation has been abject failure and quite nearly completely devastated the global economy. Never mind the largest oil spill in American history in the gulf. The tax cuts boosted the debt and increased spending on private contract corporations has turned America into corporate crony give away ever. Libertarians have everything in place except reduced spending.. massively. Guess who will fill the gap for profit? Coarse I know libertarians will be to busy paying down the debt to be throwing money out the window on private contracting of services.

What you fail to see is that indeed libertarian fiscal policy was enacted. I wouldn’t want to own up to it ether. I don’t care if you think my arguments are lousy I think your political bias is lousy. My arguments are referenced.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Oh it would be great if you could show me just where that was? I understand you don't like someone to gore your holy cow. Just get over it I don't care if you don't like my disdain for libertarianism. I didn't find your argument overwhelming or anything of the sort. Cutting taxes, deregulation, privatization are major policies the libertarian right wing fiscal policy. It doesn't matter you didn't achieve your pure utopian libertarian free market madness. It's a dam good thing you haven't managed it. You can pretend all you like these policies were not actively pursued.

But truly if you were elected as the president was in 2008.. what would you do? This is where it gets fun talking to libertarians when the actual wacky ideological political objectives have to be at least imagined. Really deregulation has been abject failure and quite nearly completely devastated the global economy. Never mind the largest oil spill in American history in the gulf. The tax cuts boosted the debt and increased spending on private contract corporations has turned America into corporate crony give away ever. Libertarians have everything in place except reduced spending.. massively. Guess who will fill the gap for profit? Coarse I know libertarians will be to busy paying down the debt to be throwing money out the window on private contracting of services.

What you fail to see is that indeed libertarian fiscal policy was enacted. I wouldn’t want to own up to it ether. I don’t care if you think my arguments are lousy I think your political bias is lousy. My arguments are referenced.

Libertarians don't belief in, deficit spending (except for the Keynesian types but only during a recession), didn't create social programs and then borrow from them leaving it at a short fall (Social Security), establishing cartels over industry and deregulating them, a large expansive interventionist military....

Should I go on?

BP is a heavily regulated oil company, their safety record is noted.
Why didn't the government go after them before hand?
 

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
Personally, I don't want a bi-partisan congress. I think the Democrats and Republicans both have good ideas that don't need either party watering them down.

Ugh. I'm the exact opposite. Democrats and Republicans pander to the crazies to get nominated and elected as well as to raise funds. Having an all partisan Congress ensures that the crazies have no opposition.

Gridlock tends to force each side's whackjobs to the sidelines. That is a good, good thing.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,164
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
We can't even be bipartisan on DP. The Republicans aren't 100% wrong. The Democrats aren't 100% wrong. I've been around just a short time and have seen a number of fair-minded posters....but the it seems the majority of posters are . . .

If Conservative, Obama hasn't done a thing right since he entered office.

If Liberal, it's alllll GWB's fault. Obama's done nothing wrong.

If Libertarian, it's everybody's fault.

Does it hurt a poster's ability to debate/influence others if he/she is so absolute? Is anything in politics that absolute?

Anybody have any thoughts?

of course i do.......people are lazy and get their views from talk radio/biased outlets. after the sherrod debacle, i am ashamed of myself. what i would like to see is some sort of compromise betweeen the parties, which used to be how it worked. since clinton was castigated, though, things haven't been the same.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Libertarians don't belief in, deficit spending (except for the Keynesian types but only during a recession), didn't create social programs and then borrow from them leaving it at a short fall (Social Security), establishing cartels over industry and deregulating them, a large expansive interventionist military....

Should I go on?

BP is a heavily regulated oil company, their safety record is noted.
Why didn't the government go after them before hand?

Republicans have placated the libertarian vote by implementing some of their fiscal policy. Primarily libertarians vote for republicans because they are scared of the left wing affinity to larger state intervention in the markets.(taxation, privatization, regulation..) The matters that were not dealt with in reality was to actually reduce the size of the government. Spending cuts.

The republicans had no problem cutting taxes at the expense of the debt and increased spending across the board. This is where libertarians should be jumping mad at the Bush administration. But what happened was libertarians were given a choice with regards to government expansion or private contracting.. guess which is more favourable to right wing libertarian outcomes?

Most serious intellectual discourse on the topic of what happened to the economy point directly at deregulatory practises in the finance industry. Libertarians have no problem with deregulation of the market in all aspects. The more deregulation the more free the market supposedly increasing liberty exponentially. Clearly the industry is against regulatory practices.. so guess who gets into the pockets of republicans in DC? Democrats are getting less financial support from big business that wants deregulatory policy, privatization policy, tax cuts etc.

So the true matter of the fact is it is libertarian policy is creating a bi partisan predisposition. Obama was actually acting against that predisposition to a large degree ideologically and to a small extent in actual policy. I say to a lesser degree in practice because the real appeal to corporate business policy is quite favourable to libertarian fiscal policy. In short Obama doesn’t go far enough in terms of state intervention then his support base wanted.

Just admit you have been duped by the same groups you are enabling. In all cases the libertarian policies that have been enacted have come back to bite the American people in the ass.

Clearly a privatised healthcare system is a full 1/3 more expensive then socialised system and corporate contracting is obviously extremely expensive. When for years the argument that private corporations did work more efficiently then government. We have clear facts that say otherwise.

Deregulation is a primary tenant of libertarianism. It is at the core of the global economic collapse, which was enabled by self regulation ideals founded in individualism. Wide spread use of unknown/ unregulated chemicals in the consumer market. Dick Cheney writing up the energy policy for America with all the big oil players signing it. I honestly think your joking or making intellectually dishonest arguments about oil industry regulations. The mms was a complete farce.. just like Cheney and the oil industry wanted. Deregulation has only led to corporate liberty.

Tax cuts have not paid for themselves and have only increased the deficit and are projected to increase the deficit. Tax cuts are obvious tenent of libertarianism. You have less money to spend on government so in order to have “balanced books” smaller government is the order.. Raising taxes is clearly so un-libertarian.

Please save your insulting character assassination regarding my supposed ignorance about libertarianism. Insisting that you know just how things would be if you could just get your perfect utopian free market anti state is a lie. You don’t know because there is no actual implementation of it in the last 100 years except Chile under Pinochet. Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Republicans have placated the libertarian vote by implementing some of their fiscal policy. Primarily libertarians vote for republicans because they are scared of the left wing affinity to larger state intervention in the markets.(taxation, privatization, regulation..) The matters that were not dealt with in reality was to actually reduce the size of the government. Spending cuts.

The republicans had no problem cutting taxes at the expense of the debt and increased spending across the board. This is where libertarians should be jumping mad at the Bush administration. But what happened was libertarians were given a choice with regards to government expansion or private contracting.. guess which is more favourable to right wing libertarian outcomes?

Most serious intellectual discourse on the topic of what happened to the economy point directly at deregulatory practises in the finance industry. Libertarians have no problem with deregulation of the market in all aspects. The more deregulation the more free the market supposedly increasing liberty exponentially. Clearly the industry is against regulatory practices.. so guess who gets into the pockets of republicans in DC? Democrats are getting less financial support from big business that wants deregulatory policy, privatization policy, tax cuts etc.

So the true matter of the fact is it is libertarian policy is creating a bi partisan predisposition. Obama was actually acting against that predisposition to a large degree ideologically and to a small extent in actual policy. I say to a lesser degree in practice because the real appeal to corporate business policy is quite favourable to libertarian fiscal policy. In short Obama doesn’t go far enough in terms of state intervention then his support base wanted.

Just admit you have been duped by the same groups you are enabling. In all cases the libertarian policies that have been enacted have come back to bite the American people in the ass.

Clearly a privatised healthcare system is a full 1/3 more expensive then socialised system and corporate contracting is obviously extremely expensive. When for years the argument that private corporations did work more efficiently then government. We have clear facts that say otherwise.

Deregulation is a primary tenant of libertarianism. It is at the core of the global economic collapse, which was enabled by self regulation ideals founded in individualism. Wide spread use of unknown/ unregulated chemicals in the consumer market. Dick Cheney writing up the energy policy for America with all the big oil players signing it. I honestly think your joking or making intellectually dishonest arguments about oil industry regulations. The mms was a complete farce.. just like Cheney and the oil industry wanted. Deregulation has only led to corporate liberty.

Tax cuts have not paid for themselves and have only increased the deficit and are projected to increase the deficit. Tax cuts are obvious tenent of libertarianism. You have less money to spend on government so in order to have “balanced books” smaller government is the order.. Raising taxes is clearly so un-libertarian.

Please save your insulting character assassination regarding my supposed ignorance about libertarianism. Insisting that you know just how things would be if you could just get your perfect utopian free market anti state is a lie. You don’t know because there is no actual implementation of it in the last 100 years except Chile under Pinochet. Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here you go again.
You assume that Republicans were placating libertarians with deregulation, which isn't true.
conservatives also favor deregulation but educated libertarians know that a cartelized industry, like the banking sector, is not deregulated until the barriers to entry are removed.
Allowing smaller banks to compete on a more equal scale with the larger banks.
Banks have had the implicit backing of the federal government for a long time.
That is not libertarianism by any measure.

You're don't know what you're talking about and your arguments show the inept ignorance you have.
Then you throw in Dick Cheney
Goodness man what's next, 9/11 an inside job?:roll:
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Here you go again.
You assume that Republicans were placating libertarians with deregulation, which isn't true.
conservatives also favor deregulation but educated libertarians know that a cartelized industry, like the banking sector, is not deregulated until the barriers to entry are removed.
Allowing smaller banks to compete on a more equal scale with the larger banks.
Banks have had the implicit backing of the federal government for a long time.
That is not libertarianism by any measure.

You're don't know what you're talking about and your arguments show the inept ignorance you have.
Then you throw in Dick Cheney
Goodness man what's next, 9/11 an inside job?:roll:

Do you vote republican? Why? I suppose you have the republican grass roots tent "The Tea Party" which is full of every variety of wacko libertarian associated with the republican party. I dont particularly care if you deny the effect of libertarian fiscal policy but its a documented fact founded directly in fiscal policy. It happened get over it and figure out what is wrong with libertarianism policy.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Do you vote republican? Why? I suppose you have the republican grass roots tent "The Tea Party" which is full of every variety of wacko libertarian associated with the republican party. I dont particularly care if you deny the effect of libertarian fiscal policy but its a documented fact founded directly in fiscal policy. It happened get over it and figure out what is wrong with libertarianism policy.

I don't vote, I let you guys ruin it.

Sorry it's not a documented fact.
That was the talking point during the whole recession, "the free market failed."
Which of course was not true, seeing that we don't have a free market.

Libertarian fiscal policy does not include deficit spending and subsidy.
Until you can show that there was no deficit spending and no subsidy, you're absolutely wrong.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I don't vote, I let you guys ruin it.

Sorry it's not a documented fact.
That was the talking point during the whole recession, "the free market failed."
Which of course was not true, seeing that we don't have a free market.

Libertarian fiscal policy does not include deficit spending and subsidy.
Until you can show that there was no deficit spending and no subsidy, you're absolutely wrong.

Fine keep your head in the sand. See if you can bother yourself to listen to this speaker.

Eliot Spitzer: The Cataclysm of 2008-2009

 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Fine keep your head in the sand. See if you can bother yourself to listen to this speaker.

Eliot Spitzer: The Cataclysm of 2008-2009

I'm not going to watch a video with Eliot Spitzer.
The man is not the for most authority of what is and is not libertarianism.
He was fully capable of cheating and lying on his wife.
Why would you take his word if he could lie to his intimate spouse?
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
We can't even be bipartisan on DP. The Republicans aren't 100% wrong. The Democrats aren't 100% wrong. I've been around just a short time and have seen a number of fair-minded posters....but the it seems the majority of posters are . . .

If Conservative, Obama hasn't done a thing right since he entered office.

If Liberal, it's alllll GWB's fault. Obama's done nothing wrong.

If Libertarian, it's everybody's fault.

Does it hurt a poster's ability to debate/influence others if he/she is so absolute? Is anything in politics that absolute?

Anybody have any thoughts?

Well - we're not passing laws, we're just debating and discussing. HUGE difference.

Also, we cannot "expect" or "require" Congress to be bipartisan because we vote them in. There will always be a majority, a minority that is close in numbers and the much lesser minority (Green, party, for example).

If we don't approve of their job or how they handle theirselves we're given the right and thus *empowered* and *should* wage that against them during the election cycles. That, as citizens, is our *job*

If the votes are up to the people it's impossible to ensure that everything is balanced.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I'm not going to watch a video with Eliot Spitzer.
The man is not the for most authority of what is and is not libertarianism.
He was fully capable of cheating and lying on his wife.
Why would you take his word if he could lie to his intimate spouse?

A very weak rebuttal.
 
Top Bottom