Jump to content

US Government Shut Down - new elections for senate and house of rep.?


Recommended Posts

Whats really sad is the president said he needed the debt ceiling increase to pay the bills. Talk about a huge LIE! So what bills are exactly being paid? All I see is more debt, bigger debt, and more borrowing!

 

Then we have our political TOOL's who cannot see past his or her party.

 

Pathetic, truly pathetic!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 329
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just thinking out loud here.....   If people like soldiers and policeman can be legally charged with 'Dereliction Of Duty' for not performing the required responsibilities of their job then why can'

Wish you guys would quit playing the game. Bush only had a surplus because Clinton stripped Social Security while he was in office. Man you ideologues are atrocious. I am glad I am not part of this ci

I never suggesed you were evil. I simply pointed out that as a matter of recent and easily remembered historical fact you and your fellow registered Republicans bear full and undiluted responsibility

!

Moderator Note

Dear all,

 

The thread has gone off topic many times already. Because we (moderators) cannot possibly untangle this long thread anymore, and because we probably should have stepped in much sooner (but didn't), we kindly request that everybody will at least attempt to steer the discussion back to the original topic. If you feel you must respond to something that is only sideways related, please attempt to keep it brief, and try to also make an on-topic remark.

 

Thank you for your cooperation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats really sad is the president said he needed the debt ceiling increase to pay the bills. Talk about a huge LIE! So what bills are exactly being paid? All I see is more debt, bigger debt, and more borrowing!

 

Then we have our political TOOL's who cannot see past his or her party.

 

Pathetic, truly pathetic!

 

If that's your understanding of the situation, then yes, there is something pathetic about it.

 

Congress, and then the president, approved a spending plan, which is more that what we take in in revenue. To make up the difference, you must borrow. If you have another way of somehow settling up when obligations > revenue, I'd like to hear it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats really sad is the president said he needed the debt ceiling increase to pay the bills. Talk about a huge LIE! So what bills are exactly being paid? All I see is more debt, bigger debt, and more borrowing!

 

What's really sad is you calling "lie" without educating yourself. We've already incurred the debt through spending legislation, bills that passed and got signed into law. The debt ceiling is a pro forma process (meaning "for form", or as a matter of principle) that promises our creditors that we will pay those debts, THE DEBTS CONGRESS HAS ALREADY VOTED ON!

 

Where were you the last time this happened? Once again, our credit rating is going to get trashed for NOTHING, costing us even more to pay back the debt, all because of extremists exploiting ignorant fear. Yay, Tea Party, the American Taliban!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats really sad is the president said he needed the debt ceiling increase to pay the bills. Talk about a huge LIE! So what bills are exactly being paid? All I see is more debt, bigger debt, and more borrowing!

Part of the problem is so many citizens... despite this having been in the news for weeks (and frankly months/years given we've done this a few times before)... still fail to realize what raising the debt ceiling even means.

 

As has been repeatedly pointed out, we're not talking about taking on more debt. We're talking about paying past debts already incurred by congressional action. Past legislation created these obligations, and those obligations must be met.

 

If we're not taking in enough revenue to pay our bills, then we must borrow to do so, but simply ignoring our bills is not an option. They will not magically go away if we pretend they don't exist.

 

I don't know how much simpler this can be explained to you.

 

 

Part of the reason our government is so dysfunctional is because so many uninformed people keep voting and supporting nonsense based flawed understanding of the facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the reason our government is so dysfunctional is because so many uninformed people keep voting and supporting nonsense based flawed understanding of the facts.

 

As long as the media continues to adopt this fake impartiality, this "both sides of all arguments are automatically equal" approach to journalism, we'll keep having citizens who are misled and misinformed. Also we've treated our health and education like they're privileges instead of rights, and now we're suffering with a sick and ignorant population that makes unhealthy and stupid choices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Count up all your enemies and you will find, I am 100 percent sure, that they have built and are maintaining the reality you depend on to live.

Ah, no, not a chance.

 

You fail to comprehend, as always. The current Republican Party, you guys, is no more an "enemy" of mine than the local meth dealing biker gang - they're just incomeptent, badly motivated, ideologically fascistic political operatives who have made a horrible mess of things and are trying to avoid facing the consequences - and even trying to make things worse yet: they have their reasons. Like a biker gang, they profit from corrupted law and failed society and bankrupted government - the power and money made available through the corruption and crippling of the US government is mind-boggling.

 

The country needs them and their chosen political representation fenced from power and removed from office, some perhaps indicted for criminal doings, and otherwise forgotten as soon as possible. Not "defeated" in some kind of battle - removed and sent home, or maybe perpwalked out the door and jailed, depending on role and behavior.

 

Your attempt to set things up as a fight between enemies, rather than an attempt to remove the corrupt and incompetent (and yes, the evil) from government, reflects immediately the Republican media tactic. The Republican strategy here is to make some kind of treaty, mutual recognition of good faith and common cause, a coming together in peace of honorable foes, the frame. That's a scam, confidence game.

 

The Republican Party is using that tactic to protect the corrupt and incompetent, the power hungry and greed motivated, from being identified as the perpetrators of this horrowshow misgovernment and the people responsible for our current mess. That is because the identification of the perps here would be an identification of their means - their Party - and vice versa.

 

Another way of putting the same thing thing is that the ideological fascists involved, the ones who need the coverup, have been in control of the Republican Party for a while and are now using it to both conceal and advance their agenda, just as they have been for thirty years or more.

 

This isn't war, with enemies - although with these guys it could become one, as it did in 1861 in the US and many times since in many other countries - but police work and housekeeping, dealing with bad guys and the messes they make.

Edited by overtone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the problem is so many citizens... despite this having been in the news for weeks (and frankly months/years given we've done this a few times before)... still fail to realize what raising the debt ceiling even means.

 

As has been repeatedly pointed out, we're not talking about taking on more debt. We're talking about paying past debts already incurred by congressional action. Past legislation created these obligations, and those obligations must be met.

 

 

I think people (including, unfortunately, many tea-party members) equate debt with borrowing and get confused.

 

We bought a weed-whacker on credit. That's the part congress agreed to — it was in the budget they passed so it was mandated to happen, and it has already happened. So the debt already exists at this point. But since we put it on our credit card, we now have to pay that bill, and we have no money, so we have to go to the bank and borrow some money to pay that debt. Borrowing the money is not new debt, but we have to get extra permission to borrow this money that congress already agreed to spend.

 

The so-called debt ceiling is really a borrowing limit to pay the debt. If congresscritters don't want to raise the debt limit, they shouldn't have spent the money in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overtone,

 

Lovely as always to hear you and Phi call for a one party system. I think you guys are wrong. We need a pluralist system. The reformers and the conservatives, to keep things from getting too tyranical in either direction. By stepping in each other's way (with a good heart) we keep power and money and the economy in a state that benefits self determination, freedom from tyranny, equal rights of all under the law and a whole host of other positive American values that we all cherish. The rewards to effort and talent, the increases of the human intrinsic values created by capability and trust, that make us all a little richer.

 

Now that cooler heads are prevailing in Washington, the push and pull, conversations, comprimises and governance of our nation, can and will continue. I don't want to see Palin and Cruz and Bachman in power, any more than you do. But I sure am glad there is somebody standing against the tyranny of the left.

 

I just read a wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sali_Berisha that I would like you to read Overtone, and give me your assessment of where the evil is in Albania. What party you would be registered in, and whether or not you would frame the democrats as the repulicans and the socialists as democrats, or the democrats as democrats and the socialists as conservatives, wishing to return to a one party, communistic rule. Bearing in mind that the democrats ran the ponzi scheme, and instituted privatization of government institutions.

 

Berisha embodies many of the fine characteristics that you and I both admire. How is it possible, in your black and white division of the definition of a good guy and a bad guy, that a democrat could run a ponzi scheme? AND be AGAINST the tyranical rule of a one party system?

 

Regards, TAR2

 

Oh, and iNow, I am countering your prediction of the Fed beginning tapering in the summer with my own prediction. I do not think our economy needs to be on life support any more. The Fed has historically lagged the market and pulled the trigger late, both in tightening and loosening the money supply, and they know that, and are anxious to at least taper QE back to zero, so they are in a position to begin raising rates, should the economy gain traction. There is A LOT of money around, in the coffers of businesses, and once people start trusting each other again and trusting the economy to be stable, people and business will start spending their cash more freely, and looking for investments in capital equipment and such that will position them for growth and profit. I predict a symbolic and small decrease in the QE at the next meeting, maybe 5 or 10 billion in purchases less, and a 10 or 15 billion decrease in each succeeding month, until QE is zero. When they actually make that symbolic taper next month, it will be taken as an encouraging sign that money is about to flow and it therefore, will. The Fed will be entertaining thoughts of adding back a half percent to the interest rate by spring, and we will be at 1 or 2 percent by your summertime mark.

 

Regards again, TAR2

Edited by tar
Link to post
Share on other sites

^Possible, but as I've shared will depend entirely on employment numbers and market performance and the state of the larger economy overall. It's an If/Then situation. It's conditional on circumstances. So, it sounds like you think employment numbers will be strong enough and market performance robust enough that the Fed governors will form a consensus to pull back on bonds purchases sooner rather than later.

 

I sure hope you're right and the economy is healthy enough to warrant that this fall. However, if the employment situation and overall economy are not yet that healthy, then I also hope the Fed will be wise enough to wait another quarter or two before changing course (if it's justified based on the evidence available).

 

Summarized: Fed action should be based on conditions, not arbitrary dates on a calendar. If employment and the economy is overall positive, the chances are higher that the Fed will begin to taper sooner. If employment and the economy are lukewarm, then an early taper is still possible but less likely. If employment and the economy are really bad, no tapering at all.

Edited by iNow
Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally. Hopefully this is a lesson well-learned by the Tea Party faction of the Republicans.

I find that unlikely. I have several very right-wing conservative friends and former colleagues on facebook who are already circulating like mad the names of the "18 true heroes who didn't turn their backs on this great nation and agree to give up like those lying hypocrites who voted to reopen the government and increase the debt ceiling without overturning the most harmful law ever passed in the entire history of history- Obamacare." Yep, they're already calling for these 18 to receive massive influxes of cash donations and fanatical steadfast unthinking support in any election where they run... Because that's what god would want.

 

Where I am hopeful, however, is that those more moderate voices will begin to speak out in favor of moderation more forcefully, and also that those who are more left-leaning and opposed all of this disgusting silliness will add a bit of passion to their own approach to stopping it. It's hard enough sometimes to get people to come out and vote. Maybe this will be the encouragement they need? Or, you know... Maybe it won't be. After all... We never did default on our debt obligations, so lots of people will probably just forget after 2 or 3 more episodes of The Walking Dead, or after the next mass shooting eats up the airwaves on our 24 hour news channels or after... Hey look! A bicycle!!. That's sort of what we do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

iNow,

 

An important component certainly is what the Fed does, but also important is what you do. Do you replace your 13 year old car or not. Do you redo the family room or not. Do you open up a new store in Clifton or not.

 

The future has not happened yet. The Fed does not know any better than you or me what the economy will look like in 8 months. Its data dependent. It depends entirely on what goods and services we buy and sell in the mean time. And what we do with our time, what efforts we make, what ideas we turn into reality, what value we can create for each other to WANT to purchase from us.

 

We are dependent on the Fed to regulate our money supply. But its us that make the economy good or bad. It always has been and always will be so. Everybody waits for the rain to stop and the sun to dry out the hay a few days, before hooking up the bailer, and going out, and making some hay.

 

The economy booms when everybody finds people to trust with their money, and crashes when nobody find anybody to trust with their money.

 

My thinking is that the same goes for power. And jduff does not trust the people that could have black helicoptors, and overtone does not trust anybody that is not as smart and liberal as he/she/it is, and iNow does not trust anybody that can't think rationally, and I don't trust anybody that can't pick the garbage up that is laying in front of their own front stoop.

 

So it does not depend on the Fed. They depend on the data. The data depends on what we do today, and tomorrow and the day after that.

 

Regards, TAR2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overtone,

 

Lovely as always to hear you and Phi call for a one party system. I think you guys are wrong. We need a pluralist system.

 

And lovely to see you ignoring what was really said so you can perpetuate more misinformation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it does not depend on the Fed. They depend on the data. The data depends on what we do today, and tomorrow and the day after that.

 

Regards, TAR2

What we do today, and tomorrow and the day after that is modulated by external factors. Does the future look rocky or rosey? IMO, things are looking up - we are getting out of wars, trying to avoid new wars and concentrating on domestic issues. We are actually trying to get people insured, which is a start to improving healthcare, which is a great drain on our system. But, congress is getting in the way and I think will continue to get in the way as long as do nothing factions are able to control a party.

 

I don't see the Fed easing anytime soon. New chair who is cautious with shutdowns always on the horizon. If congress actually came to an agreement on the budget, then it might happen, but the only way I see that happening is if the dems cave and cut spending so low that it stalls the economy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fed does not know any better than you or me what the economy will look like in 8 months.

Well actually, yes... Yes, they do. Of course nobody can say anything with absolutely certainty, but the trends and the data and a deep analysis of legislation and policies currently in place underlying society do provide incredibly important insights and economic likelihoods and forecasts can be made within pretty tight error bars, and to suggest that the people at the Fed lack knowledge about the economy in the same way you personally do suggests only that you're pretty far removed from reality.

.

 

On another note, here's a message from the president this morning.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Lovely as always to hear you and Phi call for a one party system.
Parroting Fox again, I see.

 

If anyone who describes the current Republican Party, its candidates and its officials and its corporate support and its coopted media, accurately, has to face a barrage of accusations like that, how are you ever going to clean it up or replace it?

 

Nobody here has called for a one Party system - actually I have far greater objections to the Democratic Party as it exists and behaves than you do, with the difference that you don't recognize your fundamental agreement with that Party's ideology and policies. You think it's "leftwing", mostly because you have to think that to maintain your delusion of being a sensible person voting for reasonable representation as found in Republicans.

 

Without this idiotic fantasy, right here ->

 

I don't want to see Palin and Cruz and Bachman in power, any more than you do. But I sure am glad there is somebody standing against the tyranny of the left.
you would have to face the matter of exactly what these people you fantasize as "standing against the tyranny of the left" have actually been doing, with your full support. And that will be hard - because for thirty years or more you guys haven't been showing the political good sense God gave a gopher, an animal that does not invite and welcome snakes into its hole.

 

If you don't want to see people like Palin, Cruz, Bachmann, Ryan, Rand, Boehner, Kantor, King, W, fill-in-the-name R-Texas, etc etc etc, in power, quit backing the faction that puts them in power. The people backing that faction are not on your side. They are up to no good.

 

 

 

The economy booms when everybody finds people to trust with their money, and crashes when nobody find anybody to trust with their money.
That's not why "the economy" boomed the last three times it boomed, and not why it crashed the last three times it crashed - especially obvious in the last one, which was caused by a very small number of very rich people whom very few people trusted at all.
Link to post
Share on other sites

iNow,

 

I like Obama as a president. He is pragmatic, honest and very well spoken. I did not vote for him and disagree with him at some of the same levels that I disagree with Overtone. I don't like change for the sake of change. It has to make sense, from the bottom up, and the top down, and each level and the potential consequences, as in who wins and who loses, whose power is stolen and given to another, in each circumstance, needs to be carefully debated and considered, when dealing with laws and policies and rule changes that affect 283 million separate cases of power holders.

 

I liked his speech today. I trust the man. The fact that he made bold and effective decisions in the case of the car companies, and the oil rig disaster, and Bin Laden only increased and cemented my trust in him. He is on my side. He is also my president, a post I will honor, no matter who sits in the chair. This does not mean I can't disagree with some of his decisions, or feel that he has made moves that ignore the losers he creates, blatently, or unintentionally, or unwittingly. I reserve the right to trust who I deem to be on my side, on any given issue, on any given idealogy, at any particular level, without Overtone throwing me in her/his/its reject pile and throwing me off EVERY team she/he/it is on to do it.

 

This is my point to overtone and to jduff, who both think that 90 percent of the population either think like they do, or should, and at the same time, think that half the population, or most the population is against them.

 

I think this point is crucial to understand on a lot of levels and for a lot of reasons, that have to do with the fractures in Washington, the fractures between the classes, the fractures between races, and people of various conflicting sexual orientations, religions, intelligence levels and ideologies.

 

A lesson that the president reiterated, that we all learned by the bad judgement that the tea party is exhibiting and did exhibit so clearly in this latest example, and admittedly continuing example of negative behavior. YOU CANNOT CUT OFF YOUR NOSE, TO SPITE YOUR FACE!

 

I am on jduff's team in many ways, I am on overtones team in many ways. Just because I wear a diffent jersey in a particular contest, in a particular choosing up of teams, should not, and cannot possibly throw me off EVERY team that overtone has joined, or the jduff has joined.

 

I rarely comment for effect, or to troll, but I did in the case of saying that Phi and overtone were calling for a one party system. I wanted to make the point that I knew they were not, even though they were throwing everybody, not a democrat into the discard pile. Same reason I posted the Albania link.

 

I already know I am on more teams that include both overtone, and jduff, than either of them are considering. And neither of them actually has the right or reason to throw me out of any club, where I have actually paid my dues, based on the fact that they once saw me wearing the same hat as the guy that ran over their cat.

 

Regards, TAR2

How is it even remotely humanly possible, for hundreds of men and women to make a well considered decision, to vote their conscience and exercise the full extent of their wisdom and judgement, based on every possible team they are on, and have every single one on the right side of an aisle come to the opposite decision as those on the left side? If it was not for the fact that it happens every day in Washington, I would say it was impossible.

 

Hey, I just thought of a law we could pass, that is reasonable and just, given the impossibility or the extraordiary improbability, of the aisle accidently being the dividing line between the proper and improper decision.

 

Any vote of the house or senate which results in a party line vote, shall be declared improperly influenced, ilconsidered, null and void, and the bill shall be discarded and a new and proper bill be debated, drafted and voted upon.

If we accept party line voting, either the bill is bad, or the decision is bad. One or the other or both, must be rigged.

If any rule cannot be agreed upon in good conscience by the proper majority of an assembly of freely choosen representatives of the population, it definitely should not be, the law of the land.

Edited by tar
Link to post
Share on other sites
I am on overtones team in many ways.

No, you aren't. You have teams. I don't. And you don't even know what your own team is, let alone anyone else's.

 

As you make very clear, like this:

 

I rarely comment for effect, or to troll, but I did in the case of saying that Phi and overtone were calling for a one party system. I wanted to make the point that I knew they were not, even though they were throwing everybody, not a democrat into the discard pile. Same reason I posted the Albania link.

Your Albania link was jsut like the bizarre invocation of Muslims earlier: completely irrelevant, meaningless, except as an illustration of that fantasy world (Republicans standing up to leftist tyranny) you will defend to the last straw. And never mind the walkback - your statement that I was calling for a one Party system was perfectly sincere, with you even indicating that the Party involved was the Democratic Party. All complete nonsense, and your core beliefs.

 

Or here, another illustration:

 

Hey, I just thought of a law we could pass, that is reasonable and just, given the impossibility or the extraordiary improbability, of the aisle accidently being the dividing line between the proper and improper decision.

Yes, folks, once again we have "both sides" and "Party line" and an aisle down the middle with equivalently honorable Congressmen flanking it and the whole shmear of rightwing authoritarian ass covering in a nutshell, presented by people claiming to have good sense.

 

That is of course the standard Fox line. You persist in refusing to recognize the nature of the Republican Party you have supported and backed, and the responsibility you and your team bears for this mess we are in.

 

Just to point out the obvious: The Republicans's main tactic in sinking good legislation for thirty years now has been the Party line vote. You just proposed to make that automatic - not even a majority required. You honestly believe that it would be some kind of "accident" if a proper/improper decision was split on Party lines - despite decades now of watching exactly that happen, by arrangement and concerted effort.

Edited by overtone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Overtone,

 

Well, you have already decided for me, and stated repeatedly that any proper judgement I make is a case of proper judgement, and any improper judgement I make is a mindless parroting of the Fox Republican line. This would logically lead me to believe that you believe all proper judgements are made by democrats and all improper judgements are made by republicans. This not only impossible, but not evident.

 

Evidence wise, I have lived in and around republicans and democrats and found both to be capable and trustworthy up to the limits of their capabilities and trustworthiness, which almost never was caused by or defined by their political affiliation. In fact, walking down the street and looking at folks, it is difficult to know who each voted for in the last election, and by law, they don't have to tell you, should you ask.

 

So what are the chances, that you know anything about my beliefs, my worldview, the teams I align myself with, the people I associate with, the teams I am on, the wisdom or foolishness of my choices, my intelligence level, the people I am duped by, and the people I have or have not duped, or my capabilty and trustworthyness, based on the fact that I told you I am registered republican?

 

Slim to none.

 

And what are the chances that no wise decision has ever been made by a republican? That no love has ever been exibited? That nothing good has ever been built or maintained by anyone that ever pulled a repubican lever in an election?

 

Slim to none.

 

In fact if one is to make assumptions and correlations and guesses about the registrations and voting patterns of people, based on exit polling and such, it appears that older people, with wealth and power, might tend to vote repubican, and younger people with little wealth and power might tend to vote democrat. Farm land seems to grow republicans, cities and universities seem to grow democrats. Cubans seem to go republican and Jews democratic, oppressed peoples democrat, and oppressors, republican...etc. etc. But none of these distinctions and correlations are foolproof, or indicative of proper and inproper judgement, beliefs and values nor can these distictions and correlations give one enough information to judge a particular individual's capabilities and trustworthiness, which can be assessed only by the qualities they themselves exhibit, and by the actions and the result of the actions, they themselves make in their own self interests and the interests of the people they align themselves with.

 

It simply cannot be true, that republicans are wrong, and democrats are right. Or vice a versa.

 

Regards, TAR2

If it were true, by fact and reason and unamious human decision, that there was a correct and proper and beneficial party with which to belong, we would all be registered at birth to this party and our votes would be predetermined.

Edited by tar
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you have already decided for me, and stated repeatedly that any proper judgement I make is a case of proper judgement, and any improper judgement I make is a mindless parroting of the Fox Republican line.

No, I haven't.

 

I haven't even credited you with any proper judgments, let alone a general mindlessness, and as far as parroting the "Fox Republican" (a redundancy) line, that was an observation about your posts here that do exactly that - not an assessment of your entire political philosphy whatever it may be.

 

 

 

And what are the chances that no wise decision has ever been made by a republican? That no love has ever been exibited? That nothing good has ever been built or maintained by anyone that ever pulled a repubican lever in an election?

I would say 0. And the relevance to this thread? Likewise 0.

 

 

 

This would logically lead me to believe that you believe all proper judgements are made by democrats and all improper judgements are made by republicans.

I'm sorry, but that's just unforgiveably stupid. In the future, leave me to claim my own beliefs - I at least have some idea of what I've actually posted. Either that or quote me - I'm not shy about my beliefs, and you don't need to be "led" to them by whatever derangement led you in that direction.

 

 

 

It simply cannot be true, that republicans are wrong, and democrats are right. Or vice a versa.

Of course not. But it is true that the national level Republican politicians in general (with no more than scattered, occasional, and strictly individual exceptions) have been in the wrong, promoting bad government, behaving badly, and damaging the nation, on every single major or controversial issue that has come before the US Federal government over the past thirty years. No exceptions.

 

That is because their adopted and fundamental ideology (fascism) is evil, and they have been basing their agenda, policies, stategies, and tactics, in lies, ignorance, violence, threats, intransigence, and corruption.

 

And anyone who has supported them, backed them, voted for them, or God help us registered as one of their supporters, backers, and voters, over that stretch of time, needs to re-assess their political judgment. You guys are not, demonstrably and obviously and repeatedly not, "sensible" people. Youve done a lot of harm to your country.

 

That of course says nothing whatsoever about the Democrats - not even about the national level politicians that have been my subject, let alone the private lives of regular folks that I haven't mentioned: your presumptions about my evaluations of Democratic national politics are entirely invented by yourself, reveal a remarkable incomprehension of much of the posting here, and are quite foolish.

Edited by overtone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Overtone,

 

Fascist?

 

That was a different time, and a different continent. We fought a war to defeat that ideology already. The silver haired gentleman in my profile picture was sent out as scout for his platoon, while fighting the Nazis during the battle of the Bulge, and was wounded by a machine gun bullet from a german pillbox that entered his shoulder and lodged at his hip (he was pinned behind a small mound that was not big enough to protect him and would have been killed had the browning automatic rifle of his platoon not arrived on the scene to apply covering fire as he retreated) severing a nerve in his arm that was reattached a little shorter than before, and his left hand was not very useful after that, which ended his dreams of becoming a surgeon, so he became a PhD in Psychology, had a private practice, had a patient at a time, and taught psychology and was eventually head of the psychology dept and a well respected and loved professor, to many. I grew up knowing the school and the professors that were his friends. One of those friends was a Dr. Zucker, the smartest man I ever knew. He could have an in depth conversation with you, while solving integral calculus problems for fun and relaxation, like the rest of us do crosswords. He was a Prussian, a thought leader, a genius, authoritarian and stern, but the farthest thing from a Nazi, you will ever encounter in your life. He was a philosophy professor and as reasonable a man as it is humanly possible to get. My worldview was cradled in that enviroment. As in AGAINST Nazis and Fascists.

 

Later, while I was in the U.S. Army, during the Iranian hostage crisis, I sat on alert, in a motor pool, in a German Kaserne that once housed Nazi Panzers. It was a different world, we had new enemies, we were there protecting Western Europe against the threat of Soviet invasion. I saw an American flag being burned and stompt upon at a civilian carnival, by 6 or 7 Iranians. It was one of the most powerful moments of my life, I needed to stop them, I was ready to die, our standing order was to NOT be provoked, to not confront. I was in civilian clothes but my country was being stompt on in front of my eyes, I saw two americans from my brigade approaching and as I was about to rescue my flag, they turned away, as instructed, and I stepped back. To this day I remember the moment, and often wish I had stepped in and saved my flag from discrace. May have died, may have been beat up and consequently reprimanded by my superiors, may have created an incident that changed the course of history and prevented the loss of the twin towers. who knows, but if I had stepped in, it would not have been to protect Facsism, it would have been to protect the flag of the country I love, and all it stands for.

 

Later the two folks at the lower left of my profile picture came to visit me in Germany and I had researched and located, and we three together visited, the hill by the Saar river where my father had almost died defending his nation, and freedom, and the rule of law and reason, and the Allied countries against the ideology of the Nazis. The river wound beneath, the valley was green and beautifully lush and peaceful. We met a German man on a walk and said a civil hello at the same spot on the path that my father remembers was open to ememy fire from the opposite bank.

 

Later still I traveled by myself to a U.S Military Hospital in Lanstul and saw the hostages returning from Iran and their long ordeal. I welcomed them home, along with a throng of press and others.

I love my country, I would die for my country, my father almost literally gave his left hand for this nation, and the values and ideals it stands for.

 

You are in error to call me a fascist, or to call this country a fascist nation. We simply are not. You are mistaken.

 

Regards, TAR2

Neither half of this nation is evil, and neither should fear losing it, to the other side of a silly little aisle, that only defines slight disagreements in approach to a unified goal, when compared against the history of the world.

Edited by tar
Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course not. But it is true that the national level Republican politicians in general (with no more than scattered, occasional, and strictly individual exceptions) have been in the wrong, promoting bad government, behaving badly, and damaging the nation, on every single major or controversial issue that has come before the US Federal government over the past thirty years. No exceptions.

 

That is because their adopted and fundamental ideology (fascism) is evil, and they have been basing their agenda, policies, stategies, and tactics, in lies, ignorance, violence, threats, intransigence, and corruption.

Overtone,

 

Fascist?

 

[strawman-ramble-snip]

 

You are in error to call me a fascist, or to call this country a fascist nation. We simply are not. You are mistaken.

 

I see what you did there. wink.png Make sure and claim he doesn't support the troops!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me your tired your hungry your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to be free.

 

That is the side that you Overtone, and you, jduff, and everyone that calls themselves American is on.

Only our distrust of ourselves can fracture this team and cause it to lose.

 

Phi for all,

 

Not sure what your point is. Can you be more specific?

 

? Tar

 

I am trying to offer common ground that we can all stand on, that we all do stand on, so democrats and republicans can see that they are standing on the same ground, and you keep coming back at me like I am defending Rush Limbaugh. I have no interest in defending Rush Limbaugh or Fox spin, or Nazis. I am simply speaking from my heart, about where I see common ground and common purpose and trying to engender some hope for reconciliation and trust between countrymen, that have no actual reason to fear each other.

 

What are you telling me? That I am living a lie of some sort?

 

Seriously. Tell me the way it really is, in your opinion, without using the word democrat or the word republican. Tell me what we had 30 years ago, what we have now, and where other than here, we should be instead. Without placing blame or praise on any particular actors or non actors, just tell me the decrepencies between the actual now and best possible now that could have, should have, would have evolved from thirty years ago, til now.

what is your vision for the present?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.