The Obama vs Romney battles continues

[ElQueso]

I think you did advocate the breakup of the union which sounds like 50 new countries.[\quote]

Yeah, and "they're" sounds like "their" but they don't have the same meaning.

Here's what I said:

No one ever said anything about the US breaking up into 50 separate countries. I happen to think Texas would go it alone, but who knows? Do a search on secession in the US and there are learned people out there talking about possible political boundaries that could result from a break up of the US. If I remember correctly, it usually goes from like 8 to 16 different countries.

I said it would likely result in 8 to 16 different countries, not 50.

I didn't say other elections are unimportant but that I do believe this one is. It's
Important because I believe one of the two parties has completely lost its way and electing them could do long lasting damage to the country.

Which party? Do you think that either party is not full of political hacks that have their own interests at heart over doing what's right?

I know you said you thought this election was important, but I was trying to figure out why. It seems you think one party is good and knows what it's doing and the other is lost somehow (but you don't say how). But I don't know which party you identify with to understand your reference as to why it's important, except that you would vote for the party that you feel hasn't lost it's way I'm assuming.

I honestly look at both parties and although I see differences in stated philosophies, I don't see the end actions very different. There is a lot of wrangling and fighting to get legislation passed, but in the end, just about any legislation proposed is passed, no matter how many citizens are opposed. I take as an example the way Obama's health care bill was pushed through the approval and all the ruckus that it caused, to the point where states were actually suing the federal government for relief. The cost is staggering and it won't do any good. It's a mistake, a huge one.

However, if, for example, you were saying you were voting for Romney because you think Obama will get us in even further than we are, I understand that thought completely. However, I don't think it will do any good. We have already wracked up a huge real debt, and have completely unpayable debts coming in the future that can only be handled realistically by either a truly astronomical real growth rate (no debasing of the currency - real growth and strengthening of the dollar) or a huge debasement of the value of our currency. We've been doing the latter for quite some time now.

Sorry but I don't get your reference to incarceration rates or that people are being forced a gun point to march in lockstep. Are you saying people in the US are not able to make changes politically because of jailing or worse at the hands of the government?

As for the incarceration specifically, I was referring to our "no tolerance," minimum mandated sentencing, "three strikes you're out" policies (and other idiotic crap), as well as stupid stupid things like making marijuana a controlled substance and creating an entire criminal class for something that in most ways is less dangerous and addictive than alcohol, not to mention creating another criminal class to supply those people, the criminals not being tied down to laws like other businesses would be.

The Portuguese have changed their laws to decriminalize small amounts of drugs (I believe marijuana, cocaine, heroin, amphetamines and ecstasy are included). They have seen better results in reduction of drug abuse by kids and young people, and rises in use of methadone to kick heroin addiction than any other country in the world.

Would the US EVER do that something like that, even if it could be proven to make more sense than the gut-reaction way we do things now, backed up often by pseudo-science?

No, much better to have the world's largest prison population. PUNISH! We must PUNISH!

The US federal government feeds fear to its citizens. If you don't think so, how did we get into both Afghanistan AND Iraq off the horrible murders and destruction at the World Trade Center? Weapons of Mass Destruction? Come on. They used our anger and fear to do a little nation building at the cost of soldiers' lives and limbs, innocent civilians and the pockets of the American tax payer. We have the wonderful Patriot Act and offensive searches in transportation queues, us accepting the intrusion in life and time because we're scared.

We have more and more laws, on top of other laws, on top of others, for everything. The founders of the US intended that the federal government be small and coordinate things for sovereign states and provide for a national defense. Most of them feared a tyrannical federal government. Many of them wrote about the dangers of a standing army, which we've ignored.

Now, the US is so powerful that it influences via blackmail much of the commerce and economies of the world. I can't get a bank account in Uruguay because I'm an American citizen - the US will penalize banks in other countries if they let money launderers use their banks without going through rigorous means to prove the person is legitimate. And the effort for these banks to prove a citizen of the US is NOT a money launderer (what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty) doesn't balance with the risk involved in a puny little citizen putting his money into a foreign account.

Lincoln proved the fear of a strong central government with a standing army valid when he went to war ("at gunpoint") to prevent the other states from breaking up the union, which also effectively "freed" the slaves since laws were passed in the North abolishing slavery.

The US political "leaders" make laws that affect us. They give money out to some people, taken from others, by those laws. They do so at gunpoint. Try going against what they say and you will find yourself surrounded by first law enforcement officers, and later prison guards, all of whom are backed up by guns in one way or another.

I'm not suggesting anarchy. I'm suggesting that the federal government is slowly but surely pushing 300+ million people into dependency on the federal government to make everything all better, a job which cannot be done by legislation (except removing a lot of it), and in the process they are taking our money "at gunpoint" to accomplish what they have a majority of people believing in - the Nanny State in one form or another.

I'm suggesting that if people in California (and possibly Washington and Oregon? The Pacific States of America?) want a more socialistic approach to life, let them govern themselves that way. If Texas wants a free market system with fewer regulations and taxes, why shouldn't we be able to do so? See which system works best - we have neither right now in the States.

 

[ElQueso]

What a piece of shit thread. I am enjoying my time here , AWAY from the BULLSHIT rhetoric in the US media regarding the election. One bright spot , I thought , was this forum. You all sound as bad as Limbaugh vs. Maher ! I will not read this thread further , and you all can bash each others brains out , like everyone else in America.

At least we ALL agree to complain about Christina !!

I have a suggestion, if you really, really want to keep away from the rhetoric as you say, and are not just trying to show that you're much more evolved than us apes or something:

Read the title of the threads - avoid the ones that have subject matter you don't want to be exposed to.

Win-Win situation.

 

[ElQueso]

JWB - I liked everything about the list except for the cultural and religious stuff. I'm definitely not a conservative - I can't be. I don't believe in god OR religion! But the rednecks are OK as long as they play country music! At least not too loud.

BTW - I'm not saying that you are in agreement with that list, but that at least that you found it as humorous as I did as well.

But that list does seem like the Republican Party's expanded platform. Shows to me that I have neither a place with the Left or the Right. I'm a Liberal in the sense of Washington and Jefferson, not a Neo-Liberal, Conservative or Neo-Conservative.

Maybe enough of the rest of us can find some little corner of the current political boundary that is the US that the big boys will let us have so we can prosper while they duke it out. 10%, everyone else can have %45-%45. Heh.

 

[scotttswan]

Are the red states not mostly living off the blue states?

How will JWB's proposed country fund itself?

 

[jp]

There's actually a map of JWB's new country.

 

[cbonanni]

Example of right wing media stupidity:

http://www.politicususa.com/rush-li...e-obama-conspiracy-cancel-gop-convention.html

 

[willwright]

Example of right wing media stupidity:

http://www.politicususa.com/rush-li...e-obama-conspiracy-cancel-gop-convention.html

Good one. My opinion is that Obama and the Democrats are far from perfect but the alternative tea party GOP is basically a case where the inmates are now in charge of the asylum. The GOP base today consists of the three R's. Rednecks, racists, and religious fanatics. They watch Fox news and listen to conservative talk radio not to be informed but to get confirmation of views they already hold. Their main demographic is old fat white men. Many of theses people claim to be libertarians, or interested in upholding the constitution, but are in reality authoritarians wishing to force their social and religious views on others. Much of this type of thinking is driven by fear and ignorance. Their targeted scapegoats are any groups that aren't white and part of the American Taliban (also known as the various fundamentalist Christian sects). Much of their thinking is clearly anti-democratic and racist in nature. If these people are allowed to gain control of the government the future of the US and the world at large could be much darker.

 

[scotttswan]

P.S.S..: And you won't have to "Press 1 for English" when you call our country.

on another note are Puerto Rico not voting on becoming a state for like the 5th - 6th time?

 

[ElQueso]

on another note are Puerto Rico not voting on becoming a state for like the 5th - 6th time?

I don't think they've ever actually conducted an official vote. There have been many straw polls on the question and it's been close, but the one coming up is supposed to be the first to determine if they want to change their status, the next being what that status would be - independent, common wealth or state. Seems like there may have been another option, but don't remember.

As I understand it from previous readings, but not having looked at the issue in a while.

 

[JWB]

Are the red states not mostly living off the blue states?

How will JWB's proposed country fund itself?

Actually, it's quite the opposite. The only states in the US that are truly self sufficient are Red states like Texas and Utah.

NOT that I am in any way suggesting they leave the Union.

Also should note that I did not right the letter, just found it very amusing and mostly true