More Biden Buffoonery

[Encryptshun]

I am a free market person. But the fact of the matter is that the markets aren't free BECAUSE of the outmoded infrastructure. Let's say I'm a farmer in North Dakota. I'm willing to invest the capital to put up some wind turbines on my farmland and generate power to sell. How can I do that when the power grid is so old that it can't handle the strain my source of energy (which is at a definite competitive advantage to their coal-burning power) would put on it? Those utility lines were paid for by the government through subsidies, grants, and direct public works projects, yet only the incumbent energy producers can use them. That's an unfair barrier to entry for new players in the market. Plus, those incumbent energy producers aren't charging what they should be charging, becuase their costs are subsidized by the government. So take away those subsidies while you're at it so we're comparing apples to apples.

And I disagree regarding high-speed rail. Both passenger and freight traffic could benefit from it, as super-perishable items could be transported via rail rather than having to be airfreighted at tremendous expense as well as give travelers an alternative to renting cars or flying. If you could get people from Chicago to Denver in 5 hours, (that works out to 200 mph average speed) and it becomes FASTER to take a train than to fly (Arrive 2 hours early, 3.5 hour flight time, time to debark and pick up checked luggage, etc.) and it's certainly cheaper to operate than flying.

[szh]

And that is exactly where we find our ideological rift, Z.

Yup! We have to agree to disagree then.

And the question that I still can't get answered (Z, maybe you can succeed whether others have elected not to respond) is "How do we get our economy going again, and what makes you think that your solution will work?"

My long-winded answer to this got erased due to my computer rebooting in the middle - doing a Windows update.

I will re-write it again and respond later ...

Z

[IBCoupe]

And, my problem, is that the Democrats (like Pelosi and others) are totally willing to push government financial problems out indefinitely ... without any thought to the fact that they will hurt my son's generation (and the generations after that) when the country's financial bills pile up to the point of no return.

Even if it weren't the case that Democrats have agreed to cuts, that wouldn't mean those particular Republicans weren't actually a danger to the United States.

[AZhitman]

...that wouldn't mean those particular Republicans weren't actually a danger to the United States.

Then call the Secret Service. Bring them up on treason charges. If it is as you say, then it's a job for the Federal judiciary.

[IBCoupe]

No, because I don't flip out at the word "terrorism" like the mouth-breathers do. It's just a word. The proper thing to do is recognize the problem and fix it: get them the f*** out of office.

[AZhitman]

While I don't disagree with the ends, I question the means.

Are they indeed a "danger" to the US or not?

[IBCoupe]

Yes. They are of the belief that default would be no big deal and were committed to following through on that.

[heliochrome85]

tell me greg. was senator mccarthy from wisconsin a danger to the US?

[AZhitman]

Yes. They are of the belief that default would be no big deal and were committed to following through on that.

...and there are those in Washington who are of the opinion that continued pissing away of money we don't have wouldn't be disastrous, and are committed to doing just that.

Wouldn't hurt my feelings if they were all hogtied and waterboarded, but I'm a jerk that way.

[IBCoupe]

Yes. They are of the belief that default would be no big deal and were committed to following through on that.

...and there are those in Washington who are of the opinion that continued pissing away of money we don't have wouldn't be disastrous, and are committed to doing just that.

Wouldn't hurt my feelings if they were all hogtied and waterboarded, but I'm a jerk that way.

Really? BSABSVR? You know, I bet if I googled for five minutes, I could find a freshman republican saying default is no big deal.

Meanwhile, continued pissing away of money we dont have is what responsible governments do when the economy is in the s***. Maybe you meant "perpetual?" If so, I'd love to see what you could find in five minutes.

[szh]

And, my problem, is that the Democrats (like Pelosi and others) are totally willing to push government financial problems out indefinitely ... without any thought to the fact that they will hurt my son's generation (and the generations after that) when the country's financial bills pile up to the point of no return.

Even if it weren't the case that Democrats have agreed to cuts, that wouldn't mean those particular Republicans weren't actually a danger to the United States.

And I believe that the Democrats would not have agreed to negotiate anything if they hadn't been pushed hard enough. They are a danger to the future generations of the United States.

I have only been saying this for over three decades now ... which is why I registered as a Republican when I became a citizen nearly three decades ago. Back then, the Democrats were commonly known as the "tax and spend" politicians and they have not changed their colors in any way now.

Z

[szh]

No, because I don't flip out at the word "terrorism" like the mouth-breathers do. It's just a word.

Okay ... what word(s) would cause you to flip out then? Would using terms derogatory to your race or religion do the trick? I am curious as to where you draw the line.

As a Muslim in this country, I am perhaps hyper-sensitive to using "terrorism" in the wrong way all the time in regard to my religion. So, I distinguish it carefully for a good reason.

Terrorists deserve to be drawn and quartered, as far as I am concerned, because of their direct disregard for human life and active disregard for law and order and sanity.

Your characterization of people who want fiscal responsibility in our government - including Republican politicians and other concerned citizens - as terrorists, is way over the top and way wrong.

Z

[AZhitman]

Too much Howard Stern. Using words for shock value rather than true meaning.

Brilliant quote, regardless of whether you like the source: "One of my earliest philosophical pronouncements from the earliest days of this program: 'Words mean things.' We live in a time when many politicians utter words that are meant to beguile and fool, not communicate properly."

[heliochrome85]

the difference between terrorlst and freedom fighter is no diffferent than the difference between tea-rorrist and "people who want fiscal responsibility in our government - including Republican politicians and other concerned citizens"


also, tell me syed, which party has used the demonization of muslims to raise hundreds of millions of dollars?
which party has systematically made being a muslim an offense worse than rape, child molestation, murder?
which party has elected standard bearers who have raised the anti-muslim rhetoric in this country to a fever pitch?
which party opened investigation after investigation into Islam in this country?



i refuse to support the very candidates that make living in this country as a muslim american, something to be ashamed of.

and as a muslim and an arab, i still consider what the republicans and tea party did with the debt crisis, an act of economic terrorism. and i have no qualms about using that word.

[szh]

the difference between terrorlst and freedom fighter is no diffferent than the difference between tea-rorrist and "people who want fiscal responsibility in our government - including Republican politicians and other concerned citizens"

Cute. But still not appropriate or correct.

After knowing the Taliban kill more than 30,000 (recent estimates are now 35,000) people in my country with bombs, suicide attacks, rifle attacks on innocent passerbys, and knowing that some friends of friends and relatives have been killed in these attacks, I don't want to demean their deaths.

also, tell me syed, which party has used the demonization of muslims to raise hundreds of millions of dollars?
which party has systematically made being a muslim an offense worse than rape, child molestation, murder?
which party has elected standard bearers who have raised the anti-muslim rhetoric in this country to a fever pitch?
which party opened investigation after investigation into Islam in this country?

You are generalizing, and there lies the problem. The acts of the individuals do not, and should not, reflect on everybody.

BTW, some Democrats feel the same way, and have done/said the same thing =- particularly after 911. I don't accuse the Democrat party of going overboard.

and as a muslim and an arab, i still consider what the republicans and tea party did with the debt crisis, an act of economic terrorism. and i have no qualms about using that word.

You and I strongly differ on this point then.

'Nuff said from me about this now - I will not make extreme statements just to be a firebrand for no reason.

Z

[AZhitman]

which party has systematically made being a muslim an offense worse than rape, child molestation, murder?

When I see your face on a "Wanted" poster, I'll buy it.

When you get denied rights and access to something, I'll buy it.

When you're pursued by the judiciary and your freedoms are infringed upon for "being Muslim", I'll buy it.

You're being silly.

Go try and achieve what you have in another country. C'mon, Tariq. I'd defend you with my own skin and bones from mistreatment, but I think you're elevating something "to a fevered pitch" with that statement.

p.s. This thread wasn't about supporting the idiots on the right. I wouldn't encourage that. It was about holding the idiots on the left accountable for something they'd have freaked the hell out about if the shoe had been on the other foot. "Black cloud", anyone? Puh-freakin'-leeze.

[R/T Hemi]

Come on Greg. I assume you're a WASP and as such, you have no idea what it's like to be on the short end of the racial/ethnical stick. Don't preach the "you got it good here boy" sermon if you haven't been in their shoes and experienced what any minority experiences on a daily basis.

[szh]

Come on Greg. I assume you're a WASP and as such, you have no idea what it's like to be on the short end of the racial/ethnical stick. Don't preach the "you got it good here boy" sermon if you haven't been in their shoes and experienced what any minority experiences on a daily basis.

Me, me!! How about me? I am not a WASP. And, I am on the short end of the ethnic stick ... but I don't believe in hyperbole and extreme over-reaction.

So ... do I count? I agree with Greg.

Z

[AZhitman]

Come on Greg. I assume you're a WASP and as such, you have no idea what it's like to be on the short end of the racial/ethnical stick. Don't preach the "you got it good here boy" sermon if you haven't been in their shoes and experienced what any minority experiences on a daily basis.

And your assumption would be at least partially wrong - again.

You should read my posts more carefully. I know it's a stretch, but look at it as a way to stave off Alzheimer's.

Or perhaps you'd like to take a stab at Tariq's question I posted? Didn't think so.

[R/T Hemi]

@ Z. I understand, it's called desensitization. You've spend too many hours cleaning up after Greg. Bless you Bro.

@ Greg. I do have a problem. I give the common meaning to words and phrases. I assume that'w what the author meant when he wrote them. I guess I missed the secret handshake.

[szh]

@ Z. I understand, it's called desensitization. You've spend too many hours cleaning up after Greg. Bless you Bro.

Actually, I have had to spend a lot of time cleaning up after IBCoupe and, even more so, telcoman ... nothing on Greg's or Tariq's words ... yet. I try to err on the side of less editing, not more, but have been tempted quite often - I try to walk away and cool down before I edit.

But, you didn't really answer my question to you a post or two above? How about me? Does my ethnicity not count here? I am about as non-WASP as you can get!

Z

[IBCoupe]

And I believe that the Democrats would not have agreed to negotiate anything if they hadn't been pushed hard enough. They are a danger to the future generations of the United States.

On what basis, though? Can you find a quote that says, "No cuts, EVAR!" Anywhere? Bueller?

I have only been saying this for over three decades now ... which is why I registered as a Republican when I became a citizen nearly three decades ago. Back then, the Democrats were commonly known as the "tax and spend" politicians and they have not changed their colors in any way now.

And if you're basing your political opinions on what you think other people are saying when you're not looking (because unless you can find a quote of a Democrat actually saying "NO CUTS EVAR," that's exactly what you're doing) you might want to seek help. It sounds like schizophrenia.

[IBCoupe]

Your characterization of people who want fiscal responsibility in our government - including Republican politicians and other concerned citizens - as terrorists, is way over the top and way wrong.

I don't care what it is that they want, Z. That's not what makes "terrorism." It's not the demand, it's what they're willing to do to get it. That's what I mean when I say it's a tactic.

[IBCoupe]

Too much Howard Stern. Using words for shock value rather than true meaning.

Brilliant quote, regardless of whether you like the source: "One of my earliest philosophical pronouncements from the earliest days of this program: 'Words mean things.' We live in a time when many politicians utter words that are meant to beguile and fool, not communicate properly."

Greg, why do you think I provided the definition for the word "terrorism" if not to stand by that statement? Words mean things! The dictionary tells us what they are! You're opposing the use of the word because you don't like the emotional implications, not because the word's definition doesn't fit.

[IBCoupe]

Democrat party

Things like this make me wish we had an ignore feature. It's the "Democratic Party." It's a proper noun.

[IBCoupe]

Actually, I have had to spend a lot of time cleaning up after IBCoupe and, even more so, telcoman ...

Can we have a rule that if you're going to edit other people's comments, you can't be participating in the argument at hand? Does that sound good to anyone else?

[heliochrome85]

Actually, I have had to spend a lot of time cleaning up after IBCoupe and, even more so, telcoman ...

Can we have a rule that if you're going to edit other people's comments, you can't be participating in the argument at hand? Does that sound good to anyone else?

truth.

[szh]

Actually, I have had to spend a lot of time cleaning up after IBCoupe and, even more so, telcoman ...

Can we have a rule that if you're going to edit other people's comments, you can't be participating in the argument at hand? Does that sound good to anyone else?

Since I only clean up after personal flames and insults and don't change positions or statements or threads, the answer is a resounding NO to you.

The rules are simple:

You can be as heated as you want arguing a topic or a position. I will not change the text of any such posts to censor them in any way - unless it violates the "no religion" mantra we follow here.

Stuff that directly attacks and flames other posters, particular with strong worded personal insults, will be edited if it is way unreasonable ... in my opinion.

And, when I get tired of editing them out, continued flaming leads to the usual other outcome.

Z

[szh]

Democrat party

Things like this make me wish we had an ignore feature. It's the "Democratic Party." It's a proper noun.

My mistake. I will use it correctly next time.

BTW, please feel free to ignore me and my posts whenever you want ... you don't seem to want to though.

Z

[szh]

On what basis, though? Can you find a quote that says, "No cuts, EVAR!" Anywhere? Bueller?

I have given such direct quotes (from Pelosi for example) in other threads about her "No cuts" statements on certain items - not going to bother doing it again.

I have only been saying this for over three decades now ... which is why I registered as a Republican when I became a citizen nearly three decades ago. Back then, the Democrats were commonly known as the "tax and spend" politicians and they have not changed their colors in any way now.

And if you're basing your political opinions on what you think other people are saying when you're not looking (because unless you can find a quote of a Democrat actually saying "NO CUTS EVAR," that's exactly what you're doing) you might want to seek help. It sounds like schizophrenia.

Sigh ... ... is insulting the intelligence and mental capacity of others all you can resort to when you cannot argue a point rationally?

I saw the political rhetoric from the Democratic (did I get it right?) party politicians in MA, before most people in this forum were born. I read the "Tax and spend" mantra from these politicians often enough in the Boston Globe and heard it in the local TV too. And formed my own opinions - no need to follow anybody else - MA was a Democratic party state then and now, and most people actually felt the other way from my opinions.

As always, you are way too hasty to jump to conclusions about other people's knowledge and experiences. But, if someone does not agree with your world view - right or wrong - it must be because the other person is an idiot or mentally incapacitated, right?

Z