|
|
On September 07 2012 08:50 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:48 Derez wrote: If anyone is watching, who is this? She's a good speaker. Scarlett Johnasen Well duh :p. The one before her.
|
just watch clintons speech.... gg
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault".
When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself.
|
On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself.
that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic
|
On September 07 2012 08:52 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:50 ey215 wrote:On September 07 2012 08:48 Derez wrote: If anyone is watching, who is this? She's a good speaker. Scarlett Johnasen Well duh :p. The one before her.
Heh, I had turned off my stream in anger when ABC brought Jessie Jackson on so I didn't turn it back on until you asked.
|
On September 07 2012 08:34 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:28 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 07:51 Klondikebar wrote: the deficit increased under Bush far more than it ever did Obama. ![[image loading]](http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obama-deficits-20121-e1328628047873.jpg) Please provide a means for controlling/accounting for the economic damage left by the eight years of shoddy leadership prior to Obama's presidency. If you can't, then this data is irresponsible to use as a basis to detract from Obama's economic policies, because it doesn't provide a meaningful frame of reference. Nor does it take into consideration the nature or focus of the plan. And here you are just a few minutes ago:
You might try outlining your position using reason and language. If you are correct it should be a very simple point to argue. You wave your hands saying facts don't matter because it's all Bush's fault and you want a simple point to convince you otherwise. You could get a PhD and a Nobel Prize in economics and still get it wrong. Feel free to remain secure in your knowledge that "there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans" and that the housing bubble was all their fault.
|
On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. Only works if you ignore double taxation.
|
Who just led the Pledge of Allegiance, and why was she chosen?
*edit* perhaps the who question is way more important at this point
|
On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic
I can be ridiculous too.
It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble.
|
On September 07 2012 08:59 JinDesu wrote: Who just led the Pledge of Allegiance, and why was she chosen?
Gabrielle Giffords. She was the Congresswoman shot in the assassination attempt/shooting spree in Tucson last year.
|
gabrielle giffords leading with the allegiance it brought a tear to my eye what a fighter
|
On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. It is a similar situation. Long term investments (>1 year) and certain kinds of deferred bonuses (I think) are taxed at rate of 15% starting around $65k (0% below that). Normal income is taxed anywhere between 10% and 35%, where joint filers pay above the capital gains rate after around $65k. Then there are tax free municipal bonds which aren't taxed.
|
lol, people booing the "Born in the USA" song XD
On September 07 2012 09:00 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:59 JinDesu wrote: Who just led the Pledge of Allegiance, and why was she chosen? Gabrielle Giffords. She was the Congresswoman shot in the assassination attempt/shooting spree in Tucson last year.
Thank you - I was confused at first, and then I saw her impaired movement.
From what I remember, she's a fantastically brave woman.
|
On September 07 2012 08:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic I can be ridiculous too. It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble.
i honestly don't think i'm being ridiculous. i gave you a real life example (myself), albeit i'm from australia, i'm just highlighting it does occur and the taxation mechanisms that exist can be VERY favourable to high income earners.
in case you missed it, it is ultimately your choice to believe what i say
On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax.
|
On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault".
Except that those arent demonstrably false as facts. Blaming everything bad as Bush's fault is a point of contention, it isn't a fact, but democrats aren't categorically wrong for contending it, since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office, and since it is more subjective anyway. Nor are they wrong to mock a scenario where the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries. With what Paul Ryan has in mind, there will simply be more tax money available for programs that benefit the rich, and less for programs that benefit the poor. The democrats aren't lying about what they're trying to do, nor do they deny deficit spending. By contrast, the Republicans have made claims about very specific items that are factual in nature that aren't even contextually true, some of which Clinton pointed to in his speech. So yeah, there's a big difference.
|
On September 07 2012 08:47 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:44 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 08:33 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:28 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 07:51 Klondikebar wrote: the deficit increased under Bush far more than it ever did Obama. ![[image loading]](http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obama-deficits-20121-e1328628047873.jpg) so it went from budget surplus of ~$180B to deficit of ~$460B. that is a change of $640B obama went from $460B to ~$1,080, a net change of around $620B. not to mention this is achieved straight after the effects of the GFC so yer. the deficit increased more under bush than obama. thanks for providing the source You're funny. I like you. Anyway deficits start at zero so you lose. That's even allowing you to stick Bush with budgets he never signed because Democrats refused to actually pass any. you're funny too. are you actually arguing we should overlook the net effect? what if clinton left with a $500B surplus and bush left with $0B, does that mean bush did a fantastic job because he didn't have a "deficit"? cmon, it's ARITHMETIC Clinton didn't have a $500b surplus. The majority of what he did have was from excess Social Security taxes which have been used for decades to hide real deficits and from the internet tech stock bubble which ended late enough in Clinton's second term that the fallout was shifted to Bush. And the peace dividend. And the Republican Congress.
|
On September 07 2012 09:00 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. It is a similar situation. Long term investments (>1 year) and certain kinds of deferred bonuses (I think) are taxed at rate of 15% starting around $65k (0% below that). Normal income is taxed anywhere between 10% and 35%, where joint filers pay above the capital gains rate after around $65k. Then there are tax free municipal bonds which aren't taxed.
the way my dad managed to pay signifcantly less tax was through concessions like massive negative gearing from investments which double as tax deductible items and income redistribution through trust fund. which leads me to being unsure whether either exists in the States
|
On September 07 2012 09:03 dvorakftw wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:44 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 08:33 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:28 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 07:51 Klondikebar wrote: the deficit increased under Bush far more than it ever did Obama. ![[image loading]](http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obama-deficits-20121-e1328628047873.jpg) so it went from budget surplus of ~$180B to deficit of ~$460B. that is a change of $640B obama went from $460B to ~$1,080, a net change of around $620B. not to mention this is achieved straight after the effects of the GFC so yer. the deficit increased more under bush than obama. thanks for providing the source You're funny. I like you. Anyway deficits start at zero so you lose. That's even allowing you to stick Bush with budgets he never signed because Democrats refused to actually pass any. you're funny too. are you actually arguing we should overlook the net effect? what if clinton left with a $500B surplus and bush left with $0B, does that mean bush did a fantastic job because he didn't have a "deficit"? cmon, it's ARITHMETIC Clinton didn't have a $500b surplus. The majority of what he did have was from excess Social Security taxes which have been used for decades to hide real deficits and from the internet tech stock bubble which ended late enough in Clinton's second term that the fallout was shifted to Bush. And the peace dividend. And the Republican Congress.
i know he didn't have a $500b surplus. i'm trying to understanding why you choose ignore the net effect and choose to focus on only the "deficit" portion. if you say bush inherited the tech stock bubble then obama inherited something even worse.
|
On September 07 2012 09:00 JinDesu wrote:lol, people booing the "Born in the USA" song XD Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:00 ey215 wrote:On September 07 2012 08:59 JinDesu wrote: Who just led the Pledge of Allegiance, and why was she chosen? Gabrielle Giffords. She was the Congresswoman shot in the assassination attempt/shooting spree in Tucson last year. Thank you - I was confused at first, and then I saw her impaired movement. From what I remember, she's a fantastically brave woman.
Eh, she was just an average politician, nothing special. What's special is the reminder to everyone that it's just politics, and the type of behavior directed towards her is unacceptable in our country.
|
On September 07 2012 09:04 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:00 aksfjh wrote:On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote: I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. It is a similar situation. Long term investments (>1 year) and certain kinds of deferred bonuses (I think) are taxed at rate of 15% starting around $65k (0% below that). Normal income is taxed anywhere between 10% and 35%, where joint filers pay above the capital gains rate after around $65k. Then there are tax free municipal bonds which aren't taxed. the way my dad managed to pay signifcantly less tax was through concessions like massive negative gearing from investments which double as tax deductible items and income redistribution through trust fund. which leads me to being unsure whether either exists in the States
Yeah it exists in the U.S. bigtime. Paul Ryan's plan essentially lowers the tax rate on high income earners, guts those programs funded by tax dollars that benefit the poor, while keeping those tax programs you're talking about that benefit the rich in place, while privatizing social security, and utterly killing medicare (as you heard Clinton explain). Add to that he basically opposes gay rights, and the fact that he is an anti abortion extremist and you get the picture.
|
|
|
|