1. I don't get people sometimes; that was, in my opinion, just wrong. *sighs*

2. Why did you paint this as a democrat thing? Did she say she was?

3. Regardless of party or politics, you don't kick people to the curb.

 

be well, ~A

Some folks believe they will be young forever. I'm sure as the years rapidly pass by, her opinion will do an about face.

 

Mmhm, seems a bit like she was immature.

No, just short sighted.

 

That too, but it also seems like she made an emotionally charged/based decision,etc. As if she didn't take in everything, and then decide.

 

Be well, ~Alderic

1. She wants canada's healthcare, republicans oppose it, democrats support it.

2. We were discussing Obama specifically, I said I am concerned about the statements about "prolonging their death" and "someone needs to make a decision for these people about end of life treatment", she expressed agreement with obama about the issue.

Could she be a radical extremist who has no real connection to the core democrat party? Well... then so are the democrats in congress and the white house.

My point was that I gave liberals on the street too much credit, I assumed they were just ignorant of the real intentions and are hoodwinked by the democratic party and I see I am wrong. I KNOW the democrats in congress are callous and evil because I listen to them speak venom such as the need to declare people to death for being old. But I am now seeing it is the average democrat on the street that agrees with them.

I also spoke to a liberal guy the day before and he said congress was wrong to vote against shutting down gitmo, that we need to bring them to the USA, try them in USA courts, and put them in supermax prisons.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say they're evil. Ignorant? Yes. Stupid? Yes? Opportunistic? Hell yes. Evil? No, that's just going to far; it makes it into some frivilous us vs. them - no thanks.

 

 

Those in congress perhaps; heck, even some republicans (yes, republicans)i know think Canada has things going in the right direction.

 

 

Or maybe she's just some chick that believes what she believes?

 

 

you seem to have poor reading comprehension there.

This is an irrelevant response as I was obviously saying that the democrats in CONGRESS as well as obama beleive in kicking the elderly and terminally ill to the curb.

As for her, she is merely the "last straw" so to speak. It was a string of liberals who showed me that the idiots in congress are not hoodwinking the public, but that a large portion of the population really beleives in communism, entitlement, the sovernty of dictators and the "equality" of evil to good and behaviours that lead to failure.

Her beleifs are completely and utterly ancillery to the actual issue at hand here; which is, that liberals on the street are actually represented by liberals in congress honestly.

Yet the vast majority of the republicans do not, there is a clear party seperation here and you pretend there is none.

"Boohoo, don't be divisive, there is nothing evil in judging people to death for being old, stealing from people to give to others, supporting terrorists and rogue regeimes as they try to subjugate the world, etc"... [/sarcasm]

As far as I can tell, morals and ethics have never really been the motivating force behind foreign policy, it is always power or some other national interest. If it serves their ends to support a regime that terrorizes its population or has a really strange view on what law and justice is, they will always do so. There is no exception to that rule. (Like USA having business relationships with Saudi Arabia - which is clearly not a country that has the same ideals about justice, freedom and humanrights than the US does, Germany and Iraq before 2003, Germany - Turkey.. I am sure there are examples for every memberstate of the G20, or think back to the cold war and how many dictators in Africa were helped into power by one side or the other just to keep them on their side, it is a dirty game and nobody really looks good at the end). So you can keep [sarcasm] or go into politics yourself and do a better job.

But I can really feel you with your realization that people are in fact stupid evrywhere and age is not the one thing that seperates intelligent people from idiots. But I wouldn't really limit that to one political party either, it is a fact of life.

This girl sounds like she has her head screwed on right. You might need to lighten up a little.

Most people who laugh after saying something don't actually mean it. It's a subtle social cue to be sure, but it's really just a way of flagging irony.

For example:

"The elderly should be kicked to the curb." {deadly serious expression, mad-eyed stare, set jaw} = nutter

"The elderly should be kicked to the curb." {giggle, hairflip, mimed kick} = person telling a joke who's over the political vibe the convo is taking on, but still wants to talk.

I love how people point to how its working in the EU, the UK, and Canada.

Just take a look first at populations:

Canadian population: 33 million

UK Population: 61 million

France: 62 million (one of the best UHC systems in the EU)

German: 82 million (the most populated European Country)

United States: 303 million

Just by comparing those countries to the U.S. popluation one can see that we destroy all those other countries by popluation.

Next we should look at how much the personal income tax in each of those countries is.  This is a daunting task because each has a sliding scale for taxes.  I would look at the upper-middle class to the upper class here because it would be these two classes that would be forking most of the bill. (On a side note Japan and the U.S have the HIGHEST corporate taxs and this was from 2007. Obama leaning towards the anti-big business side of the spectrum I am sure that we've taken the lead in that category.  This is one of the main reasons corporations choose to set up hqs in another country instead of the U.S.).

Canadian population: $37,178-74,357 (22%) 74358-120,887 (26%) 120,887>(29%)

UK Population: $60000<(Basic rate 22%) $60,000> (the Higher rate 40%)

France:    $36,000 to $ 95999 (30%) $96,000> (40%)

German:  $10,900-72999 (14%), $73,000-349000 (42%) $350000> (45%)

United States: 32,500-78999 (25%) $79000-199999(28%) $200000-357000 (33%) 357000>(35%)

Just looking at those tax rates you can see that our tax system isn't as high as those other countries.

UHC systems aren't going to be successful unless you have a France style tax rate system.  Germany is having some issues with their because not enough of the people are in those upper two tax brackets.  France not only slams the rich with a high tax rate but also the middle class. 

This is what is being pushed for in the states.  There is no way in sheol that just people making 200000 or more will be the only ones who get a tax increase.  As you can see with the taxes you need for most of the middle/upper-middle to fork out the cash as well.

 

 

Be as sacrastic as you want, I just do not buy that type of thinking that plants democrats as evil, republicans as good - or so on so forth. The world is already fucked up too much, why add to it? I'm going to acknowledge differences and work on solutions that are not confined to either/or.

 

 

First off, you never mentioned - or i never caught on - that she was the last domino that fell. In my opinion, you implied that those who represent liberals (i.e. dems) are doing so in a fashion that mirrors their constituents beleifs, but that just isn't so.  When I used to be a democat, I disagreed with a lot of what fellow dems/liberals wanted.

 

 

It's not that I don't realize there is a difference T, I'm not stupid. I realize that, but you're painting things black and white when it's all much more complex. Many of my beliefs are tainted with extreme pessimism and cynicism. So, if that comes across as something else, then my bad.

 

~A

 

I never said republicans are ALL good. Many of the republicans in congress are just as evil as the democrats.

But I find that democrats have more plain old evil (they admit to themselves that they just don't care about others; they always do bad things out of selfishness), while republicans have more ignorant religious fanatics who try to be good but do bad things because their religion tells them to (so they do good things sometimes, and bad things on other times).

But overall most "good" politicians associate with the republican party. Let me remind you that marthin luthar king was a republican for a reason. Republicans always stood for christianity and human rights/freedom, an odd combination (and unappealing for a non christian like myself), but it led to some good. While democrats always stood for slavery segregation and subjugation. They just switched from targetting blacks to targetting whites.

I am not painting things black and white, I realize that the situation is COMPLEX, but 90+% of republicans and 90+% of democrats agree on an issue, than its safe to call it "democrat view vs republican view". The under 10% in each party who see things differently are outliers.

I am well aware, it wasn't THAT kind of laugh. Giggle maybe is not the right word, she was not joking based on her tone, context, her reactions when I disagreed with that statement afterwards, and the way she laughed. She was deadly serious.

It might sound like she was joking from the way I said it, but it was no joke.

That being said, she herself is just one more in a long line of democrats I spoke to. It is giving the average american too much credit to assume they are easily hoodwinked dupes who are being led by the nose by crafty politicians. Speaking to people I find that the average american knows exactly what is going on, and is firmly with the republican or democrat views on the issue. Democracy actually works, the people in congress actually represent the people in the street, its just that the people in the street are the ones who are batshit crazy.

 

I call bullshit on my belief that good vs. evil does not belong in politics. honestly, it's sad and pathetic to see it. If that's the way the average American views and wants things - then God help us. I'd probably end up moving elsewhere.

You say you get that it's complex, but I am still seeing you paint everything with two colors.

 

There's also the third parties, and so on.

 

 

 

King was no republican, per se; he was - if anything - conservative. His own words show that he often criticized republican candidates/elected officials as well as had beliefs that were contrary to republican beliefs. For example, socialism.