Posted: 03/2/10 at 11:33am | IP Logged

I actually agree with the President that if you're trying to save money for college you probably shouldn't waste it in Las Vegas.  It's just good advice. 

 Kind of like, if you don't have enough money to pay the electric bill maybe you should cancel your cable tv for a while.  If you can't by food for your kids maybe you should stop buying beer.  Stuff like that.

I realize that Vegas is financially in trouble right now but most cities are.  JMHO.

Posted: 04/2/10 at 8:37am | IP Logged

popeye wrote: Why doesn't he follow his own advice? Hey Obama if we're broke maybe we shouldn;t have universal health care Hey Obama whens the last time you had to budget oh yeah never . I don't need his advice thank you.

Yeah Man, all that nonsense about more off-shore drilling, more nuke plants, tax breaks to small businesses, elimination of captial gains taxes for business, incentives for business breaking into new energy technologies...

I mean--what is he doing with all this left-wing commie stuff....oh wait..  ummm  nevermind

Posted: 04/2/10 at 10:35am | IP Logged

+1 

Those are some outstanding points too. 

Posted: 07/2/10 at 8:54am | IP Logged

politics is like a turbulent sea of refuse that throws waves all over the place.  Truth is the beach ball that gets tossed around.  It is hard to find and catch.  Grab that truth when you can as some wave of crap's going to try to take it away from you.

I still think the most effective government is one that's eating itsself instead of us.  I believe that a stalemate between branches is the best for citizens.

Posted: 08/2/10 at 1:23pm | IP Logged

I...I... I just thought it made sense that you not waste dollars gambling.  People think I'm incapable of agreeing with Obama just for the sake of being anti-liberal.  I agree with popeye that his actions don't sync with his words though. 

That's all I had to say.

Posted: 08/2/10 at 7:41pm | IP Logged

Well...

Mr. Obama is the following:

Pro Christian

Pro Muslim

Pro Jew

Pro Abortion

Pro Evolution

Pro Gay

Pro Environment

Pro Business

Pro America

Pro Global Community

Pro Gravel

Pro Toe Jam

Pro Shoe String Grommets

Pro Billy Jean King

Pro Wile E. Coyote

Pro Road Runner

Pro Luke Skywalker

Pro Darth Vader

Basically he stands for everything.  And...consequently...nothing at all.

Anyone holding any conviction...whatsoever...and I don't even mean my conviction.  Just any conviction.  Even the Pro Toe Jam group...has to have been tremendously insulted by this man.

By standing for everything it is astonishingly clear that the only thing he wants is power and worship.  He doesn't care about the particulars or the people.  It's all about the psychological orgasm.

Posted: 09/2/10 at 12:26pm | IP Logged

For some, I quess, opinion is so strong that it can overwhelm fact.  It reminds me of something I learned in school:  "Bad men need nothing more to compress their ends than that the good men should look on and do nothing."  It's from John Stuart Mill in "On Education" (1867).  Often it is paraphrased as the follwing:  "All evil needs is for good men to do nothing".

It seems to me that we are living in a sound-bite world where any load of BS, spin and out-right lie can be pawned off as the truth because people are either lazy or unwilling to learn for themselves.  We'd rather the Becks, Limbaughs, O'Reilys etc. did our thinking for us and spoon feed us the predigested pablim we are want to take.

Kind of makes Orwell look like Nostradamus. 

Posted: 09/2/10 at 1:26pm | IP Logged

Honestly Pete I am a very linear thinker by choice.  I believe in absolute right and absolute wrong.  I believe that everyone makes mistakes and I also believe that everyone has a life philosophy that is reflected in their actions revealing what they truly believe.  With a short matter of review of his own words, in context, it is a quick thing to determine what foundation his principles are seated upon.

It is one thing to make a mistake.  It is another to build a platform of contrary ideas and stated belief systems.  The most damning thing, in terms of my opinions of this man, are his own words.  His own words in context.  His speach in Cairo, the transcript of which I obtained from whitehouse.gov, as well has his discussions on the contents in science curriculum and scientific exploration (namely stem cells), his description of an "unwanted pregnancy" as being a penalty for a mistake, etc. etc. are just a few of the things that have led me to the level of disagreement I  have with this man.

Like you I do not have cable.  I get most of my news from the "other" forum. 

This just really sums up everything I feel about the state of politics today:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWCJfCP_ISM&feature=featu red

Posted: 09/2/10 at 10:47pm | IP Logged

Sir Edmund Burke said, "the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."  If there was any paraphrasing it was John Stuart Mill.

I've always considered that it was totally possible for me to listen to someone and glean for myself what is true and what is not.  Not only so but it's good to hear other's points of view even if you disagree with them.  It's part of what is called "being open minded."

I find it interesting that all those you listed are to the right of center.  As if the Rathers, Courics, and Williams' etc.are any less full of BS, spin any less, or any less liars. (by the way, I don't get cable either) 

What looks to me like Orwellian prophecy fullfilled is...well... look around.  The government is trying to tell people how much they can earn, who can and cannot have their voices heard in government, and who can and cannot have free speech.  There also seems to be a bent towards disarming people which would keep them from doing anything to stop them.  And that's just a short list.

By the way, John Stuart Mill also believed that the Progressive tax is "a mild form of robbery".  I guess that's okay until they steal from you.

Posted: 10/2/10 at 7:00am | IP Logged

The reason I used right-of-center or in some cases right-of-right examples is that this ideology was the one I was presented with--I also said in a previous post that Fox was no different than the rest, only more likely to play 'tough guy' when it came to issues related to military intelligence.  The reason I didn't cite the Burke quote, is that there is actually no documented source that I have found for his quote.  The gist of the statement I'm sure has been around for a very long time.  The source for the Mill quote was clear--so I used it.

As far as the 'government' deciding who can have their voice heard--I'd say the recent Supreme Court case changing over 100 years of election law is fairly clear in this respect.

Again, I'm not an appologist for the Liberals.  I saw posts here that were basically one sided and left unsupported.  If discussing policy, I find it more interesting to consider the details. 

I appologize for stringing this thread out.  When it comes down to it--I'm just a small middle-aged dude who throws heavy things for fun.

Posted: 10/2/10 at 8:12am | IP Logged

"There also seems to be a bent towards disarming people which would keep them from doing anything to stop them"

Ok, I may be a bit slow this morning because of the snow, but I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here.

Posted: 10/2/10 at 12:54pm | IP Logged

The second ammendment reads (As passed by Congress) :"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

As ratified by States:"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

I think I'm considered a strict constructionist in this regard as I understand the ammendment to be one complete statement and not parced by different ideas.  Therefor, I believe that BECAUSE of the need for a well armed militia, we have the right to keep and bear arms.

For those who own guns in this country, I only have one question:  What militia/Guard/Reserve or other military unit are you part of?  I do not however believe that the amendment simply says that it is our right to keep and bear arms just becasue we want to.

I don't think anyone from the NRA or any other gun lobby can legitimately say that gun owners in this country constitute a well armed militia, or some form of militia-in-waiting.

I think it is fine and correct to keep arms in this country, provided the gun owners are actively engaged in some form of military service designed to protect the 'security of the state'.

Posted: 10/2/10 at 9:28pm | IP Logged

I consider myself to be a strict constructionist also.  I just disagree with your interpretation of it.  Where we differ is on the intent of the words "necessary to the security of a free state." Your interpretation seems to stress that the state is free from outside entities (which I partly agree)  My interpretation has in view that the citizens whithin are  themselves free.  They are citizens and not subjects.  When I was in public high school I was told taught that some of the reasons for the second ammendment were...

It was a response to British attempts to unarm the colonists.  And what they had in view was, in fact, a militia-in waiting.  And that only makes sense.  Did you wait for it to snow before you bought a snow shovel?  Why was that?  What about groceries?  Did you wait till your children were hungry do decide to go to the store?  Why then would you wait till a dictator comes to power and you join a militia before you are able to get a gun?  Don't you think that by then that option would be long gone?  I'm suspicious of any polititican who tells me I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.

Posted: 12/2/10 at 11:01pm | IP Logged

One of the hard parts of carrying on these types of conversations in this type of forum is that they can become great consumers of time.  I know and can recall just enough information to get me deep into these debates.  I wish I was one of those people who had a photographic memory.  I try to be measured in any claim I make.  Some times I fail at that, other times I spend way too much time researching where I heard that and who said it.

I'm a bit more measured in my speech.  I really don't want to think in a "We/They seige mentality."  And I certainly wince anytime someone calls me "good" or uses me and "brilliant" or some such terms in the same context. I know the sin which I am capable of and the general sinfulness of each man.  

 I certainly contend that the conservative view of things, properly administered is good and commendable.  I've been told that I am a little to the right of Atilla the Hun.  Eh, who knows.  I just don't like to compromise my values.  But as of late I've become less than impressed by much of those in the Republican party who have sold out their values (and conservativism) for power.  They have let me down terribly and are as much to blame as any liberal. 

And I am deeply concerned by the direction and resolve of the current administration.  Their path may indeed be evil. 

I am reticent to call all liberals evil.  Some of them are my friends (imagine that).  Many liberals have in view looking out for "the little guy"  it's not evil to be concerned with the poor.  Their solution is just wrong.  They are concerned that there are people who are shooting each other at an alarming rate.  A honorable concern for sure.  What they seem to forget that the evil is in man's heart. etc. I'll leave it at that so as to not stir the pot and create new controversy.   This thread has gone on much longer and I have spent more time on it than I really wanted it to.