FISA Abuse

[Spartanmack]

He just said the Republican party should be no more, not that the Democrats would be the only party.

I agree wih him. Hell... the Democrats are conservative enough as it is. look how many of them consistently vote with Trump...

if we're going to have the Democrats, we need an opposition party that is actually on the left if this "Democracy" is going to work.

right, because that's what we need - a push further to the left.

 

[biggunsbob]

so you think it would be more "American" if we only had the democratic political party?

I never said that .
There should be many parties that have a shot to win. But now that you mentioned it yes out of the two terrible parties the democrats are by far better then the republicans.

 

[biggunsbob]

It's just not that important. It's a prett small % who pay any attention to it.

And they're all either old or cranky liberals looking for shit to be pissed off about.

Or old cranky liberals.

Millenials don't even know what Fox News is.

They are not the issue ..Drump using them for policy is..

 

[biggunsbob]

right, because that's what we need - a push further to the left.

Better then the out of touch Right that you represent.

 

[biggunsbob]

keep going...

Its true Google your hero Ronny and just use the facts.
Corrupt as they come. Imbecile Trump and the goose stepping Gop are just getting started . Shame they have to screw America over for their corporate overlords.

 

[tinselwolverine]

They are not the issue ..Drump using them for policy is..

I referenced old people, cranky liberals, cranky old liberals and millenials in my post you quoted.

I have no idea which of them or even if any of them are the "they" or "them" is "not the issue" nor which of them are whom Trump is using for policy, as you claim.

 

[Spartanmack]

Its true Google your hero Ronny and just use the facts.
Corrupt as they come. Imbecile Trump and the goose stepping Gop are just getting started . Shame they have to screw America over for their corporate overlords.

keep going...

 

[Spartanmack]

Better then the out of touch Right that you represent.

I represent constitutionalism, individual rights and liberty, the basic principles this country was founded on and I'm out of touch? . classic.

 

[Michchamp]

I represent constitutionalism, individual rights and liberty, the basic principles this country was founded on and I'm out of touch? . classic.

You do? oh, shit, so everyone who disagrees with you must be wrong then.

 

[Michchamp]

right, because that's what we need - a push further to the left.

on economic issues, tax policy, and foreign policy, we've been moving steadily to the right, sometimes by leaps and bounds, since the 80's.

you can see this not only by looking at the control and makeup of federal offices, but governorships and state legislatures as well.

to the extent anyone wants to complain about the situation they find themselves in, it's clear the sort of policies that are behind it.

 

[Spartanmack]

You do? oh, shit, so everyone who disagrees with you must be wrong then.

not everyone and not all the time but you're one of the most consistently wrong.

 

[Spartanmack]

on economic issues, tax policy, and foreign policy, we've been moving steadily to the right, sometimes by leaps and bounds, since the 80's.

you can see this not only by looking at the control and makeup of federal offices, but governorships and state legislatures as well.

to the extent anyone wants to complain about the situation they find themselves in, it's clear the sort of policies that are behind it.

no, we haven't. we've been moving steadily to a mix of corporate and social special interests driving economic policy.

the last paragraph is correct, but your interpretation is misguided.

 

[tinselwolverine]

on economic issues, tax policy, and foreign policy, we've been moving steadily to the right, sometimes by leaps and bounds, since the 80's.

you can see this not only by looking at the control and makeup of federal offices, but governorships and state legislatures as well.

to the extent anyone wants to complain about the situation they find themselves in, it's clear the sort of policies that are behind it.

Tax policy, the top marginal tax rate before the 80s was about 70%, and since then it's been about half that, so if this represents a move to the right, I agree.

There is a really good and important movie that came out this year, The Post, about how Daniel Ellsburg stole the Pentagon Papers from the Rand Institute, and turned them over to the media for publication (spoiler alert).

Basically, the Pentagon Papers were compiled by Secretary of State Robert McNamara, and they chronicled what a clusterfuck the Korean and Viet Nam conflicts were, under the direction of five different presidents of both parties, and their administrations - and everybody on the "inside" knew what a worthless clusterfuck was being perpetuated, and nobody wanted to "fess up" to it on their watch.

McNamara had been chronicling these for perpetuity, in the hopes that academics in the future would have access to this information.

Anyway, Viet Nam ended right around 1974...and there were no more clusterfuck wars until around 2000, and now it's 2018 and we're still kind of cluster fucking around.

So anyway, as far as foreign policy...I would say it really hasn't gone right or left.

I don't know what you mean by economic policy moving to the right.

As far as Federal Offices...if by that you mean the Congress...also governorships and state legislatures...the most prominent feature that applies to all of them is...they're all elected by voters.

So if you think the country has been moving to the right since the 80s...according to your final statement in the post I quoted here...it's the voters in our Democratic Republic that are moving it that way.

 

[Spartanmack]

Tax policy, the top marginal tax rate before the 80s was about 70%, and since then it's been about half that, so if this represents a move to the right, I agree.

There is a really good and important movie that came out this year, The Post, about how Daniel Ellsburg stole the Pentagon Papers from the Rand Institute, and turned them over to the media for publication (spoiler alert).

Basically, the Pentagon Papers were compiled by Secretary of State Robert McNamara, and they chronicled what a clusterfuck the Korean and Viet Nam conflicts were, under the direction of five different presidents of both parties, and their administrations - and everybody on the "inside" knew what a worthless clusterfuck was being perpetuated, and nobody wanted to "fess up" to it on their watch.

McNamara had been chronicling these for perpetuity, in the hopes that academics in the future would have access to this information.

Anyway, Viet Nam ended right around 1974...and there were no more clusterfuck wars until around 2000, and now it's 2018 and we're still kind of cluster fucking around.

So anyway, as far as foreign policy...I would say it really hasn't gone right or left.

I don't know what you mean by economic policy moving to the right.

As far as Federal Offices...if by that you mean the Congress...also governorships and state legislatures...the most prominent feature that applies to all of them is...they're all elected by voters.

So if you think the country has been moving to the right since the 80s...according to your final statement in the post I quoted here...it's the voters in our Democratic Republic that are moving it that way.

with 49.2% of American households receiving some form of government assistance in 2011, it's clear that economic policy has been shifting to the right. The right is all about expanding the welfare state and government led programs of redistribution.

 

[tinselwolverine]

with 49.2% of American households receiving some form of government assistance in 2011, it's clear that economic policy has been shifting to the right. The right is all about expanding the welfare state and government led programs of redistribution.

This study from the Heritage Foundation indicates that dependence on the government was already pretty high by 1980, but it has gone up since then.

When I look up the meaning of economic policy, certainly social welfare is a tenet, but the most fundamental tenet of economic policy in every description/meaning/definition is the rate of taxation; and the top marginal tax rate since 1980 is right around half of what it was for decades before.

This from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities indicates that income and wealth inequality has increased during that time period.

The Heritage Foundation is unapologetically conservative; the CBPP claims to be non-partisan/bi-partisan but tends to be seen as leaning a little left.

So I would say the shift in economic policy is kind of mixed.

 

[Spartanmack]

This study from the Heritage Foundation indicates that dependence on the government was already pretty high by 1980, but it has gone up since then.

When I look up the meaning of economic policy, certainly social welfare is a tenet, but the most fundamental tenet of economic policy in every description/meaning/definition is the rate of taxation; and the top marginal tax rate since 1980 is right around half of what it was for decades before.

This from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities indicates that income and wealth inequality has increased during that time period.

The Heritage Foundation is unapologetically conservative; the CBPP claims to be non-partisan/bi-partisan but tends to be seen as leaning a little left.

So I would say the shift in economic policy is kind of mixed.

income and wealth inequality are not basic tenets of conservative economic policy nor is a necessary or exclusive outcome policies from the right - there is no greater income inequality than in extreme left societies (see Cuba, Venezuela, the Soviet Union, etc).

I would agree that the shift is kind of mixed but the overall trend has been left.

 

[tinselwolverine]

income and wealth inequality are not basic tenets of conservative economic policy nor is a necessary or exclusive outcome policies from the right

No, of course not, and there always has been wealth inequality and there always will be everywhere and under every economic system.

When I look up the meaning of "economic policy," the first element listed in every description is taxation or the rate of taxation.

I probably mis-posted when I described it as the most fundamental tenet; I don't really know whether it is or isn't. What it is is the first thing listed in every description I saw.

 

[Spartanmack]

No, of course not, and there always has been wealth inequality and there always will be everywhere and under every economic system.

When I look up the meaning of "economic policy," the first element listed in every description is taxation or the rate of taxation.

I probably mis-posted when I described it as the most fundamental tenet; I don't really know whether it is or isn't. What it is is the first thing listed in every description I saw.

to me it would include a lot more than taxes - things like interest rate policies, trade policies, spending priorities, etc. Which of those is the most fundamental tenet is debatable but I wasn't commenting on or criticizing your phrasing there.

 

[tinselwolverine]

to me it would include a lot more than taxes - things like interest rate policies, trade policies, spending priorities, etc. Which of those is the most fundamental tenet is debatable but I wasn't commenting on or criticizing your phrasing there.

Those things are all listed in every description - along with social welfare policy being identified as a spending priority, or at least an element of spending.

But taxation is always listed first in any description; that said, I probably jumped the gun in naming it "the most fundamental tenet" because of that.

 

[Spartanmack]

Those things are all listed in every description - along with social welfare policy being identified as a spending priority, or at least an element of spending.

But taxation is always listed first in any description; that said, I probably jumped the gun in naming it "the most fundamental tenet" because of that.

you're forgiven.

on another note, what about others like unmanned lawn mowers, that's a thing now. shoot 'em? leave 'em be? what to do?