Are you smarter than a 6th grader?

[Observer]

He has no merits to see.


But... I am trying to be cordial. After all, you said he isn't really the assshole he appears to be.

I have serious doubts, however.

[Velleity]

He has no merits to see.


But... I am trying to be cordial. After all, you said he isn't really the assshole he appears to be.

I have serious doubts, however.

He does. You don't have to recognize that or be cordial. If you like bickering with him, go at it by all means.

We really should be putting these things in the Twilight Zone though.

[IM2]

Observer,

Frankly,  I can't stand your ---, but the reality is that you have the potential to be a decent human being. The reality here is that we both do agree that we want a better country, where we disagree is how to get it done.

We have seen what republican policy has wrought in this coutry for the better part of 30 years now. 12 years of Reaganomics gave us record deficits. 8 years of Clinton policy gave us projected surpluses. Regardless of his morality this was a postive.

So what did we get in return by conservative leadership in the first ten years of this century? Record deficits, a collapsed economy and failed foreign policy. Regardless of what you think this is the record left behind.

Now what is your solution for this? More of what gave us the mess. And it is a mess of conservative making. The trouble I have with you and other conservatives is that you do not take repsonsibltiy for the mess and constantly blame others when you demand responsiblity and accountability from everyone else.

This is the major problem I have with you. In every aspect of your philosophy you let off the hook real crooks and place blame on those who have been victimizxed by the crooks. Whether its race, which you should have a better level of understanding of than you do, foreign policy, the constitution or almost everything else, your positon is not good for this country.

Hammierng the point that you served does notchange this fact. If for once you would settle down and admit when you are wrong instead of continued arrogance, I do believe that you could really be a pretty cool person to debate. If you exchanged arrogance for logic, you would get more respect.

The major difference I see between conservatives in here and liberals is that liberal sseem to deal more with fact andreality and not ideology. Because no mater whosmall youwanthtegovernent to become, what you fail to see is that smaller is not always better or more efficient. On top of that, what you want the government to get out of is not what it should get out of and what you want government to get into is what it should be reducing.

For example, for approximately 50,000 per homeless person, we could end homelessness in this country. Why not support the government ending this if by doing so it makes this a better nation, eliminates poverty and makes all of us more safe and secure?

For the cost of one space shuttle, or  stealth bomber, we could erase a major problem that crosses the racial divide for example, and would ensure a move towards equality for all americans. Why are you and most conservatives opposed to this?

Why do you want to see people stay stuck in poverty and misery to support an ideology that cannot happen if this continues to be the case? Because we all pay taxes around here, the money you pay is no more important than the money I pay.

To believe that we all are not eaual because of a worship of money and income is to base your philosphy on a false beleif. Income levels do not determine human equality or even worth. Our worth is measured by how we treat humans, especially humans who are in need. So all of this ranting about wealth redistribution is simply bs. And its BS propagaged by the wealthiest americans in order to make people like you allow them to keep robbing the rest of us.

Hopefully one day you will wake up and see this.

Slavery to an ideology gets you stuck. Regardless of the stuff you post, I do believe that you are smarter than what you give us.

[Observer]

The reality here is that we both do agree that we want a better country, where we disagree is how to get it done.

I can agree with that. We have fundamental differences of opinion about what this country should be.

We have seen what republican policy has wrought in this coutry for the better part of 30 years now. 12 years of Reaganomics gave us record deficits. 8 years of Clinton policy gave us projected surpluses. Regardless of his morality this was a postive.

Clinton didn't do it. He came into office at a most fortuitous time. Unfortunately those "projected surpluses" were built on a very flimsy foundation. Two things happened that wiped them out. One was the coordinated attack on this country on 11 Sep 2001. I am not sure you fully understand just how massive a blow that was and the damage it did to the financial sector of this nation. The other was the bursting of the .com bubble. The surpluses were mostly wishful thinking.

So what did we get in return by conservative leadership in the first ten years of this century? Record deficits, a collapsed economy and failed foreign policy. Regardless of what you think this is the record left behind.

Reagan will go down in the history books as the greatest President of the 20th century.

Now what is your solution for this? More of what gave us the mess. And it is a mess of conservative making. The trouble I have with you and other conservatives is that you do not take repsonsibltiy for the mess and constantly blame others when you demand responsiblity and accountability from everyone else.

That isn't true, at all. I had some major problems with President Bush. The biggest one was letting the minority in Congress dictate to him. The other of course, was his unwillingness to use his power of veto. When the Democrats came to power, and when the Republicans were in power, he should have far more forceful in telling the "No" when they opened the checkbook and spent OUR money like a teenager with Daddy's credit card.

This is the major problem I have with you. In every aspect of your philosophy you let off the hook real crooks and place blame on those who have been victimizxed by the crooks. Whether its race, which you should have a better level of understanding of than you do, foreign policy, the constitution or almost everything else, your positon is not good for this country.

My biggest problem with you is your obsession with race and your unwillingness to look ahead instead of behind you. I have a very solid understanding of our foreign policy and there are many aspects of it with which I disagree. They are probably NOT the same ones with which YOU disagree. With regard to the Constitution... I have no doubt there is no one on this forum who has a better understanding of it than I do. It is actually a pretty simple document, relatively straightforward and contrary to what most people here think, NOT intended to be interpreted to mean whatever you want it to mean. It says what it means, no amount of manipulation and distortion by politicians and lawyers can change that. They may be able to violate it with impunity when they are in political power, but that does not change its meaning. 

Hammierng the point that you served does notchange this fact.

When I mention my time in government service, it is for a specific purpose. Unlike most, I have seen much of what is discussed on this forum from the INSIDE. When we are talking about the Middle East, I have the advantage of having lived and worked there for several years. When we talk about the military, I have the advantage of having spent most of my adult life in the military. I can speak from a perspective you have never experienced.

Does that automatically make my opinion right? No, of course not. It does however, make it more authoritative than that of someone who gets his perspective from CNN or MSNBC.

If for once you would settle down and admit when you are wrong instead of continued arrogance, I do believe that you could really be a pretty cool person to debate. If you exchanged arrogance for logic, you would get more respect.

Oh, I get plenty of respect from the people who really matter. You think that not seeing things as you do is the same as being wrong. Believe me, it is not.

The major difference I see between conservatives in here and liberals is that liberal sseem to deal more with fact andreality and not ideology.

EVERYONE works from their ideology. Again, your perception of reality isn't necessarily reflected by reality itself.

 

Because no mater whosmall youwanthtegovernent to become, what you fail to see is that smaller is not always better or more efficient. On top of that, what you want the government to get out of is not what it should get out of and what you want government to get into is what it should be reducing.

We have this little thing called the Constitution. It specifies quite clearly exactly what government should be "getting into". Anything the government "gets into" that is not specified in that document is wrong.

For example, for approximately 50,000 per homeless person, we could end homelessness in this country. Why not support the government ending this if by doing so it makes this a better nation, eliminates poverty and makes all of us more safe and secure?

Show me the article of the Constitution that permits the government to engage in charity and I will support it wholeheartedly. If you can't do that, it doesn't matter how noble a cause you masy think it is, it is not the government's business. Communities, civic groups, churches, and private individuals can do more to help alleviate the homelessness problem in this country than anything the government can do.

For the cost of one space shuttle, or  stealth bomber, we could erase a major problem that crosses the racial divide for example, and would ensure a move towards equality for all americans. Why are you and most conservatives opposed to this?

This is where we run into a difference of opinion about the fundamental role of government and specifally, the role intended for THIS government as envisioned by the men who founded it. There are many things people would like to see the government do that are not permitted by the Constitution. There are even things I would like to see the government do that are not permitted by the Constitution. However, when it comes down to the government doing those or adhering to the Constitution, I will choose the Constitution every time. Without that piece of paper, we are nothing as a country.

If we permit the government to pick and choose which parts of the Constitutionit will follow and which it will ignore, the time will come when that decision will bite us all in the ass... HARD.

Why do you want to see people stay stuck in poverty and misery to support an ideology that cannot happen if this continues to be the case? Because we all pay taxes around here, the money you pay is no more important than the money I pay.

It is absurd to claim I want people to stay in poverty and misery. And I certainly have never claimed my tax dollars were more imortant than anyone else's tax dollars. Again, it comes down to the proper and legal role of government. You are free to spend as much of your own money as you wish on whatever you wish. What you are OT free to do is spend other people's money on whatever you wish.

To believe that we all are not eaual because of a worship of money and income is to base your philosphy on a false beleif.

 Income levels do not determine human equality or even worth. Our worth is measured by how we treat humans, especially humans who are in need. So all of this ranting about wealth redistribution is simply bs. And its BS propagaged by the wealthiest americans in order to make people like you allow them to keep robbing the rest of us.

How does anyone "rob" you by keeping their own money? Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have taken nothing out of my pocket, nor have they taken anything out of yours.

[lucy]

Are Executive Orders constitutional?

[johnhp]

John, I am trying to keep in mind what velleity said about you... but I am just not seeing it.

Maybe if you were an actual detective.

[johnhp]

Calling Boffo....Calling Boffo...

Why are you running from this issue you raised?

[johnhp]

Boffoon

why are you running from this?

[IM2]

Observer,

I can agree with that. We have fundamental differences of opinion about what this country should be.

I'm glad we can agree on something.

Clinton didn't do it. He came into office at a most fortuitous time. Unfortunately those "projected surpluses" were built on a very flimsy foundation. Two things happened that wiped them out. One was the coordinated attack on this country on 11 Sep 2001. I am not sure you fully understand just how massive a blow that was and the damage it did to the financial sector of this nation. The other was the bursting of the .com bubble. The surpluses were mostly wishful thinking.

The dot com bubble was part of the growth, but Clinton inherited record deficits Observer, and they were of republican making. September 11 did not do as much damage as you guys wish to claim. It is an excuse used by republicans to defend poor policy. Bush had no real economic policy to that point and was in the process of firing his economic advisor.

We are here mostly due to the repeal of Glass-Steagall by the Gramm -Leech -Billey legisation. What Glass Steagall was there to protect us from happened because the protections were not there. This is the major cause of the collapse. And those protections are the very regulations your side talks about when it makes the claim government is too intrusive. Yet government intrusion stopped us from a collapse time after time because of the protections of Glass Steagall. But the banks who own your party said they could not live by such rules and that such rules were stopping them from growing.

Reagan will go down in the history books as the greatest President of the 20th century.

If he does then that history will not be accurate.

That isn't true, at all. I had some major problems with President Bush. The biggest one was letting the minority in Congress dictate to him. The other of course, was his unwillingness to use his power of veto. When the Democrats came to power, and when the Republicans were in power, he should have far more forceful in telling the "No" when they opened the checkbook and spent OUR money like a teenager with Daddy's credit card.

This could not be so Obserer. For 6 out of his 8 years he had a republican majority and paid little to no attention to democrats. The major problem with the republican majority is there was no oversight done on the executive by congress, and the executive vetoed no bills that came from the republican majority in both houses. On top of that he demanded the open checkbook himself by invading Iraq  which did nothing to us, and had nothing to do with 9-11.

My biggest problem with you is your obsession with race and your unwillingness to look ahead instead of behind you. I have a very solid understanding of our foreign policy and there are many aspects of it with which I disagree. They are probably NOT the same ones with which YOU disagree. With regard to the Constitution... I have no doubt there is no one on this forum who has a better understanding of it than I do. It is actually a pretty simple document, relatively straightforward and contrary to what most people here think, NOT intended to be interpreted to mean whatever you want it to mean. It says what it means, no amount of manipulation and distortion by politicians and lawyers can change that. They may be able to violate it with impunity when they are in political power, but that does not change its meaning.  

Your problem is that i am not obsessed with race. But because I do mention that race is still a problem now, which is looking ahead, refuse to accept that it no longer exists because I can personally say by continued experiences I face that it does, that you seem to think I am obsessed with something that does not happen anymore. Well it still does, and instead of denying it, why not realize it still happens and help change it, so that we can look forward and make the colorblind nation exist that you think already does?

I will respect your knowledge of foreign affiars based upon your experience in foriegn lands when you can respect my veiws on race based on the fact I am black. When you can stop telling me I am looking back because in your opinion racism does not exist. You never have had to face it, that's the only way you can come to this kind of conclusion.

And spare me the teaching oneself to fail lie O.K. I think I do not fit that lie.

I hate to inform you Observer, but your understanding of the constitution is not real good. Yes it says what it means, and there are statements in it you miss which provide for things you claim are not included in the document. You have beenshown them, and yet you still hold on.

When I mention my time in government service, it is for a specific purpose. Unlike most, I have seen much of what is discussed on this forum from the INSIDE. When we are talking about the Middle East, I have the advantage of having lived and worked there for several years. When we talk about the military, I have the advantage of having spent most of my adult life in the military. I can speak from a perspective you have never experienced.

Does that automatically make my opinion right? No, of course not. It does however, make it more authoritative than that of someone who gets his perspective from CNN or MSNBC.

I can respect this, but because you have seen things that have been done and they have been done for the wrong reason or have supported wrong in general does not mean that your support of wrong makes it right. Nor does it give your excuse making for that wrong any more weight, or changes wrong to right. We supported Saddam, you helped. We have killed for corporate interests, you helped. This does not make your opinion inivalid, but your claim that what you say is final is right just because you were there is. Wrong is wrong, and our involvement in the ME has been for the wrong reason, we have supported the wrong people and most of it has come back to bite us as we are fighting some of the very people we helped while you were there.

Wrong stated authoritatively is still wrong. If you know the reason that does not change it to right. Whether you were on the front lines of it, or read the wrongful action in Newsweek, the actions were still wrong. This is what I think you need to understand about where I come from in this discussion.

Oh, I get plenty of respect from the people who really matter. You think that not seeing things as you do is the same as being wrong. Believe me, it is not.

The problem is that they are just as lost as you are. Conservatives ing eneral are lost. What they belive is basically wrong. Its been shown to be so, and we are reaping the benfits of it right now. If what we are enduring now does not make you undestand that what you believe is not right for this country,then thats your problem. I do not even begin to think that just because someone does not agree with me they are wrong. Its when the facts do not support anythign they say,when they have been shown multuple times by different people that what they say is incorrect, when the bulkload of evidnce shows that what that person says is incorrect, then I can accuratley state they are wrong. Thi s is what has happened to you time after time. So then perhaps you may need to find other people who matter because you run around with a crowd of people who are lost and blind.

We have this little thing called the Constitution. It specifies quite clearly exactly what government should be "getting into". Anything the government "gets into" that is not specified in that document is wrong.

Yes it does. And the document gives the government broad capacity to enter into things, and it is that part of the document that goes right over your head.

EVERYONE works from their ideology. Again, your perception of reality isn't necessarily reflected by reality itself.

I KNOW that my perception of reality is far more advanced than yours observer. You are inflexible, and refuse to change or alter your ideology even when it shown that your ideology will not work. It is this inflexiblity that makes reality pass you right on by.

Show me the article of the Constitution that permits the government to engage in charity and I will support it wholeheartedly. If you can't do that, it doesn't matter how noble a cause you masy think it is, it is not the government's business. Communities, civic groups, churches, and private individuals can do more to help alleviate the homelessness problem in this country than anything the government can do.

No they cannot. They don't have the money. Just as you claim to be an expert in war and foreign policy I am an expert here. The government is not supposed to be in the war making business if we look at the document as you do Observer. Yet you support this and don't care about what it costs you or anyone else. The fact is that the constitution does allow for assistance for those in need, its all related to necesary and proper, and thats just a clause that passes you by all the time.

Whats so wrong with government trying to make it so that poverty does not exist? Why do you blindly support government sponsored killing and any action that allows this killing to occur and never ever once complain about the constitutionality of such killing? Why did you support an expensive multi trililion dollar military build up based upon paranoia when if we had used that same multi trillion to end poverty, it would have been erased. Don't you think that perhaps your priorities are a bit backwards?

This is where we run into a difference of opinion about the fundamental role of government and specifally, the role intended for THIS government as envisioned by the men who founded it. There are many things people would like to see the government do that are not permitted by the Constitution. There are even things I would like to see the government do that are not permitted by the Constitution. However, when it comes down to the government doing those or adhering to the Constitution, I will choose the Constitution every time. Without that piece of paper, we are nothing as a country.

If we permit the government to pick and choose which parts of the Constitutionit will follow and which it will ignore, the time will come when that decision will bite us all in the ass... HARD.

You don't know what the founders envisioned for this country. On top of that we do not make rules today based upon life in the 1700's. That is foolosh. We must adapt rules to meet modern realities. No organization exists sucessfully by sticking to 200 year old rules and not making amendments to fit the realities of the times. There were not 300 million people in this country when the founders wrote their words. You see Observer what you fail to understand is that the manner  in which poverty/homelessness was dealt with then was either indentured servitude, slavery or debtors prison. So private charity could take care of the very few who were poor and not beholden or enslaved. Today both are illegal indentuer3eed servictude or slavery andthe numbers of people who are poor or homeless are in the milions.

So then a responsbile government does what it takes to erase major problems in its society. Our constitution allows for responsible governance.

Your failure to learn or understand American history allows you to actually believe the last line you wrote. The reality of history shows that we have picked and chose what we want the consitution to do, and you are doing so right now.

It is absurd to claim I want people to stay in poverty and misery. And I certainly have never claimed my tax dollars were more imortant than anyone else's tax dollars. Again, it comes down to the proper and legal role of government. You are free to spend as much of your own money as you wish on whatever you wish. What you are OT free to do is spend other people's money on whatever you wish.

The same goes for you. I would rather rmy money go to help an american to not work, than to pay for people who will then use the money we give them to rebuild what we blew up, to kill americans. You don't seem to understand that I pay taxes just like you, and I do believe that my money should not be going to build more bombers, bombs and tanks. I think my money is being wasted by paying 1,000 for a bullet, and 3 billion dollars for rhe latest air force  killing machine. I do believe that my money would be more constructively used to feed people instead of killing them.  To help people get work instead of blowing up factories, and to erase homelessness and poverty instead of creating more homelessness, anger, and poverty by it being used to increase our war making capacity.

So what you are NOT free to do is spend my money on war making. We have domestic priorities that we are bound by the constitution to take care of first.  Period, and no matter what you interpret the document claims, your interpetation is simply incorrect.

I think you really do need to go take an advanced level course at your local college as it pertains to constitutional law.

How does anyone "rob" you by keeping their own money? Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have taken nothing out of my pocket, nor have they taken anything out of yours.

In short what you believe costs me more, and is not saving me anything. I am not in the top  percentile of wage earners, so then I did not get any breaks. I am part of the 99 percent of people who did not get to keep more of their money. Thats where the robbery comes in. Over 90 pecent of our national welath is controlled by 3-5 percent of the population Observer. That 3 percent who have so much they could buy nations and own them, want more. And don't think you have any chance to get there. The closest you are going to get is when you guard one of them. Still though, they will wave this apple in front of your mouth hoping hat you are a dumb ass horse and not a thinking human being.  

When io you have enough money Observer? Is there ever a time when someone has more than what they need?  Yet they tell you that those who do not believe as they do want to take your money, when the reality is those who believe as I do only want to make certain that we do not  get such an inequity in wealth that we experience a bloody violent revolution that creates a nation run by dictators.

Yet you listen to the richest people in the world, people who have so much money they can give away a miliion per day and still die miliionaires, tell you that you allowing tax dollars to be spent on anything but making certain the very rich can get all they need to get richer is the way to go. That is what you have fallen for, and thats why we sit here, a broke dick nation damn near in collapse.

[johnhp]

September 11 did not do as much damage as you guys wish to claim.

Let's be fair IM.  The Conservatives used 911 to go into Iraq and drive up the debt.  The republicans decimated the budget with 911.