Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371432)

Oh I'm glad :D

Originally Posted by molson (Post 2371433)

I'm disappointed that it's looking more and more like prop 19 won't pass in California. So we won't have the Obama administration stepping up federal criminal enforcement of state-legal California marijuana. The public response to which would have been very interesting.

Originally Posted by molson (Post 2371433)

I'm disappointed that it's looking more and more like prop 19 won't pass in California. So we won't have the Obama administration stepping up federal criminal enforcement of state-legal California marijuana. The public response to which would have been very interesting.

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371616)

Maybe I was raised differently.

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival (Post 2371622)

Ridiculous situation all around.

There are three clear acts of stupidity here and one despicable act. First, whomever the organizers for the event were, they badly failed in their job to have adequate security in place. Second, MoveOn.org for paying some chick to leave from PA and follow Rand Paul around just to get a stupid freaking picture. Third, the idiot chick for trying to charge through a crowd to get at a political figure while wearing a wig and without any clearly identifiable purpose.

Then there's dirtbag who decided to be a big man and put his foot on her shoulder and stomp down. Thankfully he's been charged with 4th degree assault and hopefully is found guilty.

Anyone complaining about her being taken down is just stupid. I help train US Capitol Police for situations just like this. If I were in a crowd around a political figure, and someone charged like that, I'd put them down and keep them there until security/police show up. It's the right thing to do regardless of who the politician involved is. Anything that can be legitimately considered a threatening act, and this very clearly could, should be treated as such.

Kudos to the guy who grabbed her around the waste and took her to the ground. There was no way to tell what was really going on and he acted responsibly with justifiable force.

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival (Post 2371628)

The guy who first grabs her by the waist and takes her down and the guy who stomp her are different fucking people. The first one did the right thing. The second is rightly charged with 4th degree assault.

The lack of security/police is part of the problem and that's the fault of whomever organized the event in the first place.

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 2371677)

LOL.

Disclaimer: Rand Paul has shown his true colors and is just another Republicrat and nothing like his father. If I lived in Kentucky I would definitely vote Libertarian and think Paul is as useless (maybe more) than a Democrat would be. He supports more war, more government in social issues, yuck. I had higher hopes when he first appeared on the scene but he sold out to the machine at some point very early in his campaign.

However, if you guys really think this is more than the good old smear tricks that campaigns have been running for years and are going to blame Rand Paul for a volunteer (and a very questionable "volunteer" at that) than go on with your Bush Jr/Obama back and forth. You can't really buy into this pre-election bullshit can you? Rand Paul has nothing to do with this (though of course it is front page news on all the liberal stations across the nation. LOL)

Originally Posted by Passacaglia (Post 2371681)

Honestly, I don't think most of us here are saying this says anything about Rand Paul -- we're just pissed that this shit goes on.

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371679)

Questionable volunteer? He was the County whatever-its-called for the campaign.

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 2371683)

LOL

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo (Post 2371691)

:p

I wasn't saying Paul had anything to do with it, or condoned it or whatever (although it sure took him long enough to come out with his outrage against it).

But you can't call the guy a "questionable volunteer" if he's the county-head for the campaign. Not like they just picked him up off the street or something. That's a mischaracterization of his role.

Originally Posted by SteveBollea (Post 2371707)

Um, that of course is why the RSCC is spending millions on the race and this race is one of the ones _they_ have to win to have any shot at the Senate majority. So yes, it is completely out there.

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos (Post 2371326)

+1

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371279)

Learn what Socialism is before using the word.

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371807)

You're both right (and I'm sure you love to hear that). I should have used Marxist, not Socialist . . .

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2371807)

You're both right (and I'm sure you love to hear that). I should have used Marxist, not Socialist . . .

Originally Posted by JediKooter (Post 2371931)

Everybody is a victim...

Originally Posted by Passacaglia (Post 2371937)

How dare you say that to me? I demand an apology.

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2371838)

Pick up an 8th grade Civics book when you get a chance.

Just because you heard the word thrown around on some talk show doesn't make it right. Read what Marxism is and then realize how utterly stupid you sound. You are up there with those who called Bush a Nazi. People parroting something they heard to try and look informed, while looking like a moron to anyone with an IQ over 80 (or an 8th grade education in government).

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2372344)

Good times. Let's keep this up.

8th grade civics book? I would look at one, but it's obvious you're not through with it yet.

For the sake of argument, the summary of Marxism from Stanford University's Encyclopedia of Philosophy is fairly straight forward for ya. It states, in relevant part, Karl Marx (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

So, although I initially supported President Obama, I have moved closer to the Conservative's point of view since his election. The expansion of government is alarming to me at this point and I want less government in my life, not more. And, I see Capitalism, which I believe has made this country so great, slowly eroding when it is seen as evil (as portrayed by the powerful public employee unions and the President).

I live in CA and I have plenty of friends who are Democrats, and the majority of them are disillusioned at this point with Obama. (Which is pretty consistent with polls I've seen.) Health Care Reform, the landmark legislation that will likely define President Obama, is not being well received by the folks I know. When it is fully implemented in 2018, I believe the politicians instrumental in passing it (Pelosi, Reid, Obama) will be vilified for generations to come. Once our employers decide to pay the penalty and send us off to the exchanges, we will realize the claim that we would keep our health plans was unfounded.

The problem with all this is that when the Republicans last controlled Congress and the Presidency, they went crazy and spent money like drunken sailors. So, I don't have a lot of faith in them either at this point.

That is why the bipartisan approach is so important, which is where I jumped into this thread. I expect inexperienced Congressmen to be partisan, but the tact Obama is taking is really beneath the office of the Presidency. I believe most Americans are moderate and just want these politicians to quite the bickering and get to solving the country's problems.

Originally Posted by Groundhog (Post 2372348)

Obama is who I hoped he wasn't.

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2372344)

Good times. Let's keep this up.

8th grade civics book? I would look at one, but it's obvious you're not through with it yet.

For the sake of argument, the summary of Marxism from Stanford University's Encyclopedia of Philosophy is fairly straight forward for ya. It states, in relevant part, Karl Marx (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2372344)

So, although I initially supported President Obama, I have moved closer to the Conservative's point of view since his election. The expansion of government is alarming to me at this point and I want less government in my life, not more. And, I see Capitalism, which I believe has made this country so great, slowly eroding when it is seen as evil (as portrayed by the powerful public employee unions and the President).

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2372344)

I live in CA and I have plenty of friends who are Democrats, and the majority of them are disillusioned at this point with Obama. (Which is pretty consistent with polls I've seen.) Health Care Reform, the landmark legislation that will likely define President Obama, is not being well received by the folks I know. When it is fully implemented in 2018, I believe the politicians instrumental in passing it (Pelosi, Reid, Obama) will be vilified for generations to come. Once our employers decide to pay the penalty and send us off to the exchanges, we will realize the claim that we would keep our health plans was unfounded.

Originally Posted by WSR (Post 2372344)

The problem with all this is that when the Republicans last controlled Congress and the Presidency, they went crazy and spent money like drunken sailors. So, I don't have a lot of faith in them either at this point.

That is why the bipartisan approach is so important, which is where I jumped into this thread. I expect inexperienced Congressmen to be partisan, but the tact Obama is taking is really beneath the office of the Presidency. I believe most Americans are moderate and just want these politicians to quite the bickering and get to solving the country's problems.

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2372367)

So by all means, point us in the direction of the candidate who is on the stump promoting cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Veterans Benefits, and our military. I'd love to see how many votes they'll get. And if you aren't for cutting those areas, you aren't serious about cutting spending.

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2372367)

I know exactly what Marxism is. I simply don't see how we are shifting anywhere near Communism. Can you provide some examples of this? Understanding that Communism means the end of wage labor and abolishing of private property. As well as the ownership of the means of production. Those are some massive changes to everything I've seen take place although you seem to have more information on this than the rest of the world. Please enlighten us on what has been done to shift our country in that direction (and big spending doesn't mean Communism).


Can you provide examples of how Capitalism has eroded?

Last I checked, we were all able to start companies, work for who we want to work for, and pretty much do whatever we want with our careers. Out of the 500 largest companies in the world, nearly 30% of them are based in the United States. I run a small business myself, so if you have insight into when I can expect to be taken over, it would be appreciated.


I doubt it will define him. Medicare didn't define President Bush despite it being a much larger health care overhaul that will cost much more in the long term. Can you tell me what aspect of the health care plan has you so disillusioned?

As for employers paying a penalty and dropping you, wouldn't you be fine with that? You just railed a paragraph up about capitalism, and by God in a free capitalistic economy, employers should have a right to determine who they provide health insurance to. In fact, you should be against any penalty whatsoever for a company not carrying you since that's bigger government. Unless your "big government" anger doesn't apply to your health insurance. You are worried about employers not covering you, yet his plan actually gives them incentive to carry you. I'm thinking you didn't quite think that argument through.



Here's a little secret, both parties are the same. They will both spend ridiculous amounts of money because in the end, it's what people want. Sure we don't want a giant national debt, but we also want things. We want Social Security, Medicare, good schools, nice roads, and a big bad military to keep us safe. There have been a lot of polls that show this. Ask someone if they want to cut spending and they'll say yes. Ask them if they want to cut education, military, health care, roads, police, etc and they'll say no.

Now take a look at where our spending comes from. The majority of it is tied up in Social Security, Medicare, military, and Veterans benefits. About 67% goes to those areas. Another 9% goes to just paying interest on previous debt. So the only way you're going to really put a dent into our deficit is by cutting those areas.

So by all means, point us in the direction of the candidate who is on the stump promoting cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Veterans Benefits, and our military. I'd love to see how many votes they'll get. And if you aren't for cutting those areas, you aren't serious about cutting spending.

Originally Posted by SteveBollea (Post 2372460)

Actually, 92% of American's would prefer wealth distribution like Sweden's over ours.

Originally Posted by SteveBollea (Post 2372469)

Yeah, all the American government ever has done is defeat fascism, build an Interstate Highway system, put a man on the moon, all but eliminate extreme elderly poverty, and cover the health care of the elderly for much cheaper than private insurance.

But yes, Sweden's a social democratic state. Which is where I, who's probably the most liberal poster on here, am politically. I've never seen anybody on this board advocating for taking over the means of production.