quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: Nothing is impossible!! Do you think during the great depression people looked around and decided there was no point in trying anymore? That they should just give up! No they did not! They got up and took what little they had and went out and rebuilt a nation. A nation that for the next 3 decades was the greatest in the world. I think of the world right now like a broken glass globe. People keep trying to take the shattered pieces and put them back the way they were before but it will never be quite right. So what do you do? You take those shards of broken glass and turn them into something new! Maybe even better than before. This country needs a restored sense of hope and that is something nobody else can give you. If you want to change the world then pull up your bootstraps and do it!

I agree!!

Melt it down.

quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: Nothing is impossible!! Do you think during the great depression people looked around and decided there was no point in trying anymore? That they should just give up! No they did not! They got up and took what little they had and went out and rebuilt a nation. A nation that for the next 3 decades was the greatest in the world. I think of the world right now like a broken glass globe. People keep trying to take the shattered pieces and put them back the way they were before but it will never be quite right. So what do you do? You take those shards of broken glass and turn them into something new! Maybe even better than before. This country needs a restored sense of hope and that is something nobody else can give you. If you want to change the world then pull up your bootstraps and do it!

So much has changed since your example, we are no where the nation we were then.
But you are right in the sense that it will take a total collapse before people will drop their partisan beliefs and pull together attempt to put it on the right track.


What it will become is anyone's guess, don't think it will be what anyone can envision though.
I am thinking Eloi and the Morlocks!

quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: Nothing is impossible!! Do you think during the great depression people looked around and decided there was no point in trying anymore? That they should just give up! No they did not! They got up and took what little they had and went out and rebuilt a nation. A nation that for the next 3 decades was the greatest in the world. I think of the world right now like a broken glass globe. People keep trying to take the shattered pieces and put them back the way they were before but it will never be quite right. So what do you do? You take those shards of broken glass and turn them into something new! Maybe even better than before. This country needs a restored sense of hope and that is something nobody else can give you. If you want to change the world then pull up your bootstraps and do it!

Not that your optimism is a bad thing. But it reminds me of this.

The only way I see the people taking back the country without force, is through the vote.

You (insert whatever poitician here) get voted in, you have 1 term to prove you can get something done, if not your gone, public service isn't supposed to be a lifetime gig. vote politicians out often enough and they will get the picture that they work for us.

having said that, I'm not sure if there are enough people that will vote for "what the country needs" over their own wants any more,

my voting comes down, in most cases, incumbent out!!!

It's ok to have an open mind
just not so open, that your brains fall out. Joe

quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: Nothing is impossible!! Do you think during the great depression people looked around and decided there was no point in trying anymore? That they should just give up! No they did not! They got up and took what little they had and went out and rebuilt a nation. A nation that for the next 3 decades was the greatest in the world. I think of the world right now like a broken glass globe. People keep trying to take the shattered pieces and put them back the way they were before but it will never be quite right. So what do you do? You take those shards of broken glass and turn them into something new! Maybe even better than before. This country needs a restored sense of hope and that is something nobody else can give you. If you want to change the world then pull up your bootstraps and do it!

No, they didn't. WWII is what ended the depression.
What we need is a new World War. Small localized conflict are nice and stimulate industry, but it has to be a global conflagration to take out all of our economic competitor's engines of industry. Then the economy will rebound like it did from the 40's-60's.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: No, they didn't. WWII is what ended the depression. What we need is a new World War. Small localized conflict are nice and stimulate industry, but it has to be a global conflagration to take out all of our economic competitor's engines of industry. Then the economy will rebound like it did from the 40's-60's.

Not sure if serious.

we have the best system money can buy

the problem is not the system or the people

it is the money and buying part

the lobbyist's job is to buy government
why that is legal I donot get

but it is a very profitable biz
one that needs to be far closer regulated

quote Originally posted by ray b: the lobbyist's job is to buy government why that is legal I donot get

Think lawyers, the biggest slime-balls for the most part.
They are about 6% of the population, but 50% of the federal elected officials.
I rest my case!

[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 09-13-2013).]

We are about to enter a new age and I really mean that. Recent developments in fusion energy have had promising results. And I'm not talking about "cold fusion". That is complete and utter nonsense. Normal "hot" fusion occurs naturally in stars and scientists are currently trying to repllicate that. The fusion in question happens when 2 isotopes of hydrogen (deuterium and trititium) are exposed to insane heat and compressed to about 1/1000th of their original size. When that happens, the atoms each lose their electrons which allows the protons to fuse together. These newly combined protons regain their electrons. The 2 atoms literally fuse together to form helium. This produces a tremendous amount of energy which can then be collected in the same manner as uranium fission in a nuclear powerplant. Unlike uranium fission, however, the radiation released is gone is less than an instant and produces 6 times the energy. We have had the ability to do this for several decades in the form of the hydrogen bomb. Current working reactors like the one at the National Ignition Facility have acheived fusion through the use of ultra powerful lasers. The tricky part is using less energy to fuse the atoms than the energy the fusion will produce. We know it is possible to do because this process is happening right now in the sun. We just need to figure out the correct reactor design and method to compressing the hydrogen. The only thing standing in our way is, you guessed it, money. The current administration plans to cut funding to the national ignition facility over the next few years which means someone else will have to unlock this technology. And that somebody is none other than Lockheed/Martin! Their reactor design uses powerful electromagnets to compress the hydrogen to acheive fusion and they seem to be having the best results.

This technology is coming soon and it will promise cheap, clean energy for the entire world! Even big oil is powerless to stop it because Lockheed/Martin has much more power in the government. The age of fossil fuels is coming to an end. Having access to near unlimited energy will change the way the world works.

?

quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: We are about to enter a new age and I really mean that! This technology is coming soon and it will promise cheap, clean energy for the entire world! Even big oil is powerless to stop it because Lockheed/Martin has much more power in the government. The age of fossil fuels is coming to an end. Having access to near unlimited energy will change the way the world works.

I believe it.more of less. It ain't too soon though. Oil is still too big so Their plans are probably still 50 years out at least.
But it ain't going to be the masses that enjoy it.

It is going to be the select elite and the genetically approved.

When they don't have a use for the masses anymore then there won't be a use for the masses. Figure that out.

[This message has been edited by pokeyfiero (edited 09-13-2013).]

quote Originally posted by spark1: ?

?

quote Originally posted by NoMoreRicers: ?

Hahaha, I want some of what he's smoking

This would be a good start:

National Referendum on Congressional Term Limits, I think but don't recall, it would only take 38 states to have it pass?

A couple of recall elections like Colorado has had would be good to getting back on track, think this will be a wake-up call for some in other states in 2014

quote Originally posted by RilesOfSmiles: We are about to enter a new age and I really mean that. Recent developments in fusion energy have had promising results. And I'm not talking about "cold fusion". That is complete and utter nonsense. Normal "hot" fusion occurs naturally in stars and scientists are currently trying to repllicate that. The fusion in question happens when 2 isotopes of hydrogen (deuterium and trititium) are exposed to insane heat and compressed to about 1/1000th of their original size. When that happens, the atoms each lose their electrons which allows the protons to fuse together. These newly combined protons regain their electrons. The 2 atoms literally fuse together to form helium. This produces a tremendous amount of energy which can then be collected in the same manner as uranium fission in a nuclear powerplant. Unlike uranium fission, however, the radiation released is gone is less than an instant and produces 6 times the energy. We have had the ability to do this for several decades in the form of the hydrogen bomb. Current working reactors like the one at the National Ignition Facility have acheived fusion through the use of ultra powerful lasers. The tricky part is using less energy to fuse the atoms than the energy the fusion will produce. We know it is possible to do because this process is happening right now in the sun. We just need to figure out the correct reactor design and method to compressing the hydrogen. The only thing standing in our way is, you guessed it, money. The current administration plans to cut funding to the national ignition facility over the next few years which means someone else will have to unlock this technology. And that somebody is none other than Lockheed/Martin! Their reactor design uses powerful electromagnets to compress the hydrogen to acheive fusion and they seem to be having the best results. This technology is coming soon and it will promise cheap, clean energy for the entire world! Even big oil is powerless to stop it because Lockheed/Martin has much more power in the government. The age of fossil fuels is coming to an end. Having access to near unlimited energy will change the way the world works.

Do you know that this was a vision of the future back in the 50', the 60's and the 70's. It is almost Utopian in nature. Fusion has been 20 years out for about 70 years now. I am sure that sometime we might just figure it out. But, throwing government money at it probably won't get it done.

Watch this.
It only goes to about 33 minutes, then goes to Q&A. It is well worth your time.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MadMark:

Language, Boarders and Culture by Michael Savage may also be worth the read.

[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 09-14-2013).]

quote Originally posted by theBDub: Watch this. It only goes to about 33 minutes, then goes to Q&A. It is well worth your time.

I'm 20 minutes in.

I've seen Brook once before when he debated with Doug Casey. I was not impressed with his very contradictory position.

But his message from your video is not bad so far. Besides possibly his lisp or accent or whatever that is.

quote Originally posted by NoMoreRicers: He also seems to be pretty pro-big military and pro-war. (”Dr. Yaron Brook, the executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute … warned that “Islamic totalitarian states pose a severe threat to the security of the United States,” adding that a way to defeat these regimes “is to kill up to hundreds of thousands of their supporters.” This, he said, would “shrink popular support for extremist ideas to a small minority of the population,” instead of the 40% which he claims supports such regimes now”)

I was not a fan of when he said we should monitor all mosques, etc. I think the heart of the message, though, was solid.

quote Originally posted by theBDub: I was not a fan of when he said we should monitor all mosques, etc. I think the heart of the message, though, was solid.

Yeah, he's good on markets, basic freedom, etc. but his objectivism is heavily conflicting with libertarianism. He endorsed Romney over Paul. He says libertarianism is evil. Etc.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I would love it if states were more powerful, but with more power would come more unique regulations, causing more difficulty for businesses and movement of goods and services, etc.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: I can't agree.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: So, when you have to show your papers to cross state lines, or when a car company has to make 40 different models of cars for 40 different states, or if a state puts an import tax on products from another state, you don't think that would impede business? Businesses use federal highways and, in my local case, federal shipping locks to move commerce. So, take those away.... now you have increases in the costs for products. These are just a few of the things that help keep our economy going and businesses need the feds to help them succeed.

When the states did have more power, when did you ever have to show your papers, ? You do know you have to show them now don't 'cha ? Even to go to the grocery store. Look at that bar code on your license plate, registration sticker, and inspection sticker.
Why would a car manufacturer have to make different models for different states, ? Kalifornia is the only state that has mandated special vehicles.
Why would a state put import taxes on interstate commerce, ? Fact is, some states impede business by high intrastate taxes and union laws.
How would states having more power take away federal highways or federal shipping docks, ? Hmm ... what is a federal shipping dock ? We have ports in Texas and none are federal that I am aware of.
Businesses DO NOT need the feds to succeed. You speak of increased costs for products. The fed's regulations do that, many of them stupid.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: ... both businesses and individuals rely on both the state and federal government to help keep things moving forward.

Ha ! The federal government relies on businesses and individuals. Individuals rely on the government to enforce laws. Regulations are not laws.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: As for failure leading to success. Of course it can, and it can also lead to continual failure.

Let Darwin figure it out. It's just nature culling the heard. Some ideas need to fail.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: We have all benefited from one government program or another. That is what makes this country great. You can fail and still come out on top and the reason is because you are not doing it alone, even if you want to believe you are.

This country was made great by the individual. Too many government programs are awry.

quote Originally posted by cliffw:

hmmm.... it is called LOCKS, not docks. You know... the St. Lawrence seaway and the Soo Locks....

I don't remember showing papers when crossing state lines.... unlike traveling through Europe.

Businesses have always used government to their advantage. How about those highways and railways? How about the waterways? Don't forget the air ways. Lots of federal involvement, that couldn't be done at the state level.

But I guess you will just tell us how governments are keeping businesses "down"...

The reason the US is strong is because of the government structure we have. Is it perfect? Nope. But it does work well and only needs a few corrections here and there to stay on track. Less federal government is good (we currently have too much), but taking it to the extreme is only going to hurt our country.

[This message has been edited by jaskispyder (edited 09-16-2013).]

Take back?
what makes you think you had it in the first place?

dynasties & heirs is always at the root of these things. look under that rock, and see what can be done against generational forces.

and, funny that the word "republic" means just that as well. That the representives be basic "John Q Public", not Nobles.

every game & sport has made attempts to make the play fair, and not make it possible to "buy a win". and all fail. we know it when we see it, but usually cant prove it.

quote Originally posted by Cliffw:

BTW... you talk about many of the federal regulations that are stupid? Shall we go the other way and just stop all regulations? You know.... like China - because that works so well.... especially if you like lead in your children's toys. People forget that meat inspections came about because companies couldn't regulate themselves and customers were left to gamble that their meat products were safe to eat. Frankly, I am glad we have a few regulations like this.

[This message has been edited by jaskispyder (edited 09-16-2013).]

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: But I guess you will just tell us how governments are keeping businesses "down"...

You don't have to ask twice. Actually, you don't have to didn't ask but I will tell you anyway. Not that this thread topic was "Could American Business Take Back America".
I have worked my industry for 36 years. Never have I seen a guy catch on fire. Never ever have I heard about a guy catching on fire (and I get too many safety briefings). Now, anybody who works in my industry and any people who step on the property in which my industry operates must wear FSC's. Fire safe clothing. They are uncomfortable, hot, and expensive. Other industries are mandated to the same thing. Why ? It retards my industries profit margin because a business must supply any safety gear needed. Which costs the consumer more and is an issue when deciding to give raises.
Let's talk restaurants. Now, anything you serve must, is mandated to, have a caloric count posted. Salad for instance ... each different salad dressing one might serve, each has to have a separate caloric count. Why ? People are fat because they want to be fat. If they want to be skinny do they need to learn rocket science ? What's next ? Forcing a gym to post caloric burn rate figures which each different type of exercise, with variables for specific amounts of time of exercise ?
Examples abound on the costs gooberment encumber businesses with. Which takes away from everyday Americans deciding on how to better the economy.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: The reason the US is strong is because of the government structure we have.

Hmm, used to be. We are getting weaker. Gooberment policies are failures. Jimmy Carter's newly created Dept. of Education ? Pfffttt. Millions(?)/billions(?)/a trillion(?) dollars and we keep dropping statistically compared to the rest of the world ? Even with the obvious failures, Dumbs still are against school vouchers where as a parent has a choice to put their child into a school which does better.
Lyndon B Johnson's War on Poverty ? Slightly more effective than the War on Drugs, maybe not. Both are failures.
Examples abound here too. Your argument, as I see it, is socialism is the answer. We have always been stronger than socialist countries and there is a reason why. The strength of the individual. The individuals made the whole, not the other way around. The structure we had has been perverted. We are not a democracy, we were a republic.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Is it perfect? Nope. But it does work well and only needs a few corrections here and there to stay on track. Less federal government is good (we currently have too much), but taking it to the extreme is only going to hurt our country.

Spit it out. It was never perfect. What corrections would you favor ? Less federal government means what to you ?

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: hmmm.... it is called LOCKS, not docks. You know...

Ah, my bad, locks. The raising and lowering of water ways so to connect then into a single navigable route. How 'bout those railways ? Built by private companies. Which did have help from local governments who wanted the railway to come through their town. It was not just companies but local town citizens helped for their own betterment. The canals ? Private and local funding. How did the federal gooberment get control over that ? I had to school myself on early canal funding. President Madison rejected federal funding. It got done anyway.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I don't remember showing papers when crossing state lines.... unlike traveling through Europe.

Traveling through the United States of Europe ? You did not cross state lines in Europe. You entered a different country. The European Union is an economic pact (tax free commerce) just as much as NAFTA is.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Businesses have always used government to their advantage.

Just as we use the IRS code to our advantage, .

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: How about those highways and railways? How about the waterways? Don't forget the air ways. Lots of federal involvement, that couldn't be done at the state level.

The federal gooberment took notice on how private railways empowered towns and states. The federal gooberment wants control. Why does it need it ? To pick winners and losers ? Different international countries can manage the airways. Why can't different states do the same thing ? Businesses learn from each other, states can too.
I agree the federal government can be an arbitrator but it does not need to be a dictator.

Could we the people "take back" America?

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: So, somewhere around 1965? 1865? 500 BC? Before Negros could vote? Before women could vote? How far back works for you?

Sorry NEPpy, didn't mean to ignore you. I missed your post.
Before woman and Negros ( is that not now a racist term ? ) could vote ? HELL YEAH.
The blackskins didn't need the right to vote in 1965 nor did they need to be freed in 1865. It should have been done sooner. Women can vote, ? That's a good thing. Now I can vote twice, . Kidding, yes women should have always been allowed to vote.
To the original topic. We do need a reset button. It was not perfect then but our imperfections have become malignant.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Frankly, I am glad that we have a few too. The problem is we don't have a few.

Nope, but we elect people to decide on how many we should have. It all gets back to elections and people want our government to do more. Is that bad? Nope, that is just where it is going at this time. You may not like it, but the majority of voters seem to... or at least they are not vocal enough about not liking it.

Don't forget, many of these regulations are probably back room deals, so we get meat inspections because someone else gave in on highway regulation for a mule deer crossing (or whatever)

No, we cannot "take back" America until we fully pay off the Chinese. Until then, it's theirs.

On a more serious note, if actions of "taking it back" are revolutionary in nature.. then we can't take back anything we just destroyed. We CAN start something new with many of the same old ideas, but the minute we change the "leaders" in this country by means other than laid out in the Constitution, then this country we know ceases to be and that document loses the sacred quality of defining who we are.

Then again, if we are no longer the United States, then we no longer owe China all that money.

So we file bankruptcy, restructure, fire some of the deadbeats and non-essential personnel and start in the black. Actually, I think that's a great idea.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 09-17-2013).]

quote Originally posted by tbone42: No, we cannot "take back" America until we fully pay off the Chinese. Until then, it's theirs. On a more serious note, if actions of "taking it back" are revolutionary in nature.. then we can't take back anything we just destroyed. We CAN start something new with many of the same old ideas, but the minute we change the "leaders" in this country by means other than laid out in the Constitution, then this country we know ceases to be and that document loses the sacred quality of defining who we are. Then again, if we are no longer the United States, then we no longer owe China all that money. So we file bankruptcy, restructure, fire some of the deadbeats and non-essential personnel and start in the black. Actually, I think that's a great idea.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: ... we elect people to decide on how many regulationswe should have. It all gets back to elections and people want our government to do more. Is that bad?

Actually, that is far from the truth. We don't get to vote in the Regulators nor weigh in on their deemed regulations. The regulators do not face the wrath of the voters. It is not that the people want them or the gooberment to do more. It is the gooberment which wants this power/control. Factor in the executive appointment of czars, most of which do not need Congressional approval, and the problem is exasperated.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Don't forget, many of these regulations are probably back room deals, so we get meat inspections because someone else gave in on highway regulation for a mule deer crossing (or whatever)

That is also a problem which needs to stop. Bills should stand on their own and there should be no riders/vote buying.

Could we the people "take back" America?
We also need to take back the schools. Which are indoctrinating our children. When we were the premiere education system in the world we had grade school, jr high, and high school. We were smarter then. There was kindergarten available but not required. Now we have pre-K and head start. Just to absolve parents from nurturing their children, gooberment run day care if you will.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Actually, that is far from the truth. We don't get to vote in the Regulators nor weigh in on their deemed regulations. The regulators do not face the wrath of the voters. It is not that the people want them or the gooberment to do more. It is the gooberment which wants this power/control. Factor in the executive appointment of czars, most of which do not need Congressional approval, and the problem is exasperated.

No... you still vote for those people who control the regulators and if you don't like the regulations of the regulators, then vote out those who control the regulators and the laws which regulators follow.

Congress should make a law about "czars", if the voting population doesn't like it. Which means, you still have the power to make changes in the government.

Any real change will happen at the polls.... and you have witnessed it when Obama was elected. People grew tired of the then current government. Even if you don't agree with the outcome, you have seen a change brought about by voters and that same thing could happen again. so get out and get people to vote for your candidates.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Any real change will happen at the polls ... and you have witnessed it when Obama was elected. People grew tired of the then current government.

You would have me believe that ? People grew tired of the portrayal which was delivered by the biased liberal media. Tell me. What about the Bush regime were they tired of ?

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Even if you don't agree with the outcome, you have seen a change brought about by voters and that same thing could happen again. so get out and get people to vote for your candidates.

When will the Dumbocrats reign in it's IRS and allow to us to have a level playing field ?

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 09-18-2013).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: When will the Dumbocrats reign in it's IRS and allow to us to have a level playing field ?

lol - a what? who is it that you are crying is being treated unfairly?!

quote Originally posted by cliffw: You would have me believe that ? People grew tired of the portrayal which was delivered by the biased liberal media. Tell me. What about the Bush regime were they tired of ? When will the Dumbocrats reign in it's IRS and allow to us to have a level playing field ?

Bush wasn't running against Obama.

As for why Obama over McCain, this is just a wild guess, but lets just say that McCain and Palin were not the best candidates put forth by the GOP. Frankly, I think the GOP thought they had it in the bag and didn't even bother to look any further than from within their top ranks. Too bad, as the GOP could have done something great, but again, they missed the opportunity (and again in 2012).

Liberal Media? You mean Fox News? Lots of GOP supporters were tuning into Fox News and even they couldn't sell that ticket to their supporters.

BTW, I have a feeling people were tired of the wars and the recession started, at the end of the Bush era. People were looking for someone different, someone not like the standard cookie-cutter GOP/Dem candidates. But that is a guess, as Obama was an unknown. But I have a feeling that people were tired of the way things were going and with the recession starting, people wanted different leadership.... someone to fix the problems at home and stop spending resources in the middle east. (again, just a guess, but you asked)

I am not sure what you mean "reign in"? Congress sets the tax laws, the IRS enforces it. Is the IRS breaking the law? If so, what is being done about it? Why is it just a democrat issue? You have the Republicans focusing on the Health Care Act so much, that they can't seem to do anything else. Can you say "broken record"? Geez.... the horse is dead, time to move on. If they want to remove that Act, then give the voters something they can support. And by that, I mean a real plan, not the same old empty promises. For me, I would welcome a good plan, and I think other voters would also.

Frankly, the whole tax thing needs to be revamped, but neither party will do anything productive for the country (now, they will do what it takes to get votes, and that is why voting is very important, and gives citizens the power back to the government).

[This message has been edited by jaskispyder (edited 09-18-2013).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: When will the Dumbocrats reign in it's IRS and allow to us to have a level playing field ?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: ... who is it that you are crying is being treated unfairly?!

You should really pay more attention.
It would those that believe in free speech.
Crying ? I suppose you believe it is a phoney scandal, . I am not crying, I am pissed off. The election process has been stolen from "we the people".

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Bush wasn't running against Obama.

'Ya think ? M^cSame was. Remember that name ? The liberal biased media portrayed that Bush was indeed running.
You still did not answer my question.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: What about the Bush regime were they tired of ?

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: As for why Obama over McCain, this is just a wild guess, but lets just say that McCain and Palin were not the best candidates put forth by the GOP. Be what it is

I can't argue with you there, though Palin did have a good track record of taking on the establishment. McCain was a very poor top choice and the repulsivecan sheeple wanted him. I do think Romney was the better candidate in '12. He is a businessman and this country needs to take care of business/finances, and allow/help the economy grow.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I don't think we can ever go back, while keeping the economy moving forward.

I see we disagree. Do you really think gooberment is responsible for a good economy ? How does the black market do so well ? The economy is not moving forward.
This is the worst recovery from an economic depression ever. Median household wage levels are at 1989 dollars (and the dollar is nowhere near as strong, gas prices are much higher as well as most other things including college and health care). The President's policies have blacks suffering the most. Followed by young adults especially black young adults. College graduates live with their parents. Nobama should be accused of helping the rich as he has done so. That accusation is usually reserved for repulsivecans.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Liberal Media? You mean Fox News? Lots of GOP supporters were tuning into Fox News and even they couldn't sell that ticket to their supporters.

You would have me believe that ? One conservative news outlet against all the others and it was a close election. It was not a mandate. Added to the fact is that the IRS silenced conservative voices.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: BTW, I have a feeling people were tired of the wars and the recession started, at the end of the Bush era.

The Dumb leaders voted in their majority for them, , and Dumb ideals caused the recession, ie 'every one should have a house'.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: People were looking for someone different, someone not like the standard cookie-cutter GOP/Dem candidates. But that is a guess, as Obama was an unknown. But I have a feeling that people were tired of the way things were going and with the recession starting, people wanted different leadership.... someone to fix the problems at home and stop spending resources in the middle east. (again, just a guess, but you asked)

They got someone different alright, . Nothing is better and the argument can be won that it is worse.
Where to start ? I already mention that this is the worst recovery in history. How 'bout that national debt ? Nobama has increased it more than every other President combined, . What did we get for it ? Countries which are leaning to replace the US dollar as the world's currency.
How 'bout that "leading from behind" policy ? It created a power vacuum which the Soviets filled, . The Dumbs said the world hated us. Now they are laughing at us, . Our allies can not trust us and no one even backed Nobama's red line. That was not because they don't agree with the notion. It was because Nobama did nothing for two years to develop a coalition. It was also because of Nobama's leadership which was stupid. Telling the Talioban we will leave in 2014, . The Taliban don't wear watches but always looked at their wrists when saying "we have time". Nobama abandoned all the forward strides we made in Iraq and allowed it to develop into a morass.
How 'bout that NobamaCare ? The beginning of the 25 hour work week. All the jobs the touts that his regime has created ? Part time 3 to 1, .
How 'bout that stimulus ? To claim saved jobs ? Thank god for goooberment for hoodwinking. The trillion dollar stimulus ? Payoff to his minions and advancement of his pipe dreams. It has done nothing for "we the people".
How 'bout his leadership ? Divide and conquer. NobamaCare, when he had both houses of Congress, when he should have been concentrated on the economy, was "my/our way or the highway". A concept he embraces today. He has polarized the nation more than it has ever been before. Racial relations are the worst that they have been in a long time. He has not brought the nation together.
How 'bout his end runs around Congress ? Does he think he is a dictator ?
We got sumthin' different alright.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I am not sure what you mean "reign in"? Congress sets the tax laws, the IRS enforces it. Is the IRS breaking the law? If so, what is being done about it? Why is it just a democrat issue?

The IRS is violating the Constitution. The Supreme Court held up freedom of speech to allow so we can ... :

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: ...get people to vote for your candidates.

Why is it the Dumbs can't allow free competition ?

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: You have the Republicans focusing on the Health Care Act so much, that they can't seem to do anything else. Can you say "broken record"? Geez.... the horse is dead, time to move on.

They can't do anything anyways. The Senate Leader Harry Reid will not allow House votes to come up for a vote. Speaking of a vote ...

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: If they want to remove that Act, then give the voters something they can support. And by that, I mean a real plan, not the same old empty promises. For me, I would welcome a good plan, and I think other voters would also.

We have you on record saying that your health care is gonna be better, cost less, the economy won't be affected, taxes won't be raised one dime ("Nobama"), it will only cost less than a trillion (it is now doubled) ? What was that you were mumbling about empty promises ? Do you see the polls ? Americans don't want it. Unions want no part of it and they championed it. Government employees want no part of it. Businesses are dropping health care benefits. The old way worked for me. The Dumbs are buying votes. The Repugs had ideas. Which did not fit the regime's narrative. Such as buying across State lines, limiting frivolous lawsuits/curtailing the lawyer cash cow.
YES, the health care dilemma could have been addressed. That was not a calling by the voters in the 08 elections. The Dumbs have been trying to do this for years and they capitalized on their only chance after repeated failure. When the economy was more important.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Frankly, the whole tax thing needs to be revamped, but neither party will do anything productive for the country (now, they will do what it takes to get votes, and that is why voting is very important, and gives citizens the power back to the government).

Your a little incoherent here. Do you mean we should allow them to buy our votes ?
You say "we the people" wanted something different. The Repugs enabled a Tea Party. Where is the Dumb's Coffee Party ?

quote Originally posted by ray b: we have the best system money can buy the problem is not the system or the people it is the money and buying part the lobbyist's job is to buy government why that is legal I donot get but it is a very profitable biz one that needs to be far closer regulated

Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to buy back our politicians?

quote Originally posted by cliffw:

Cliff, not much more can be said... you don't like Obama and the Dems and you tell us how much people hate what they have done, yet... the election of 2012 put them back in charge. I am starting to think that there is a minority of haters who are very vocal about their beliefs ... I think they go by the name "Tea Party"

BTW, the Tea Party pretty much gave the election to Obama and Dems.... twice.

I am still waiting for the Republicans to come up with a counter offer to the Affordable Health Care Act. It doesn't even have to be a health insurance program, it can be something that makes health care more affordable, and obtainable. But.. yet, we don't see anything new from the Republicans on this. Just blank stares when they are asked for their solution to the rising health care costs.

Here in MI, under REPUBLICAN leadership, our taxes have gone up, and more people were moved to government run health care.

quote He (Snyder) said the Healthy Michigan bill will help “hard-working people. They just don’t make a lot of income.” “We should be proud when we help one another,” Snyder said. “Shouldn’t that be what we should be doing?” He said it’ll be good for the health care system in that costly emergency room visits can be avoided in lieu of primary-care physician visits and good for small- and medium-sized businesses because it’ll make them more competitive. Snyder said the next challenges will be educating and signing up people, and teaching them about wellness and personal responsibility. ... But, he said it’s a tremendous start, which will affect about 320,000 Michigan residents next year and about 470,000 by 2021. He said giving residents the opportunity to see a primary-care physician as opposed to an emergency-room physician for routine care will cut down on financial waste. Brian Connolly, Oakwood Healthcare System president, said about 26,000 uninsured people sought care in the system’s emergency rooms last year, and that those who will be covered under the new plan will return with “more confidence, more self-esteem.” http://www.themorningsun.co...-into-law-at-oakwood