Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:03:04 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Hi All,

With all the new endorsements from both parties, most in favor of Barrack Obama, citing his ability to inspire and unite----

---Isn't that what we've been saying we needed? Someone who can work across party lines, listen to and consider all points of view?

Or is the problem not the lack of such a leader, but entrenched stances?
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:08:12 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		what we need to to fire both parties and put real folks in their that answer ONLY to us the peons, and not the global elite.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:10:27 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Do you then consider McCain and Obama, or for that matter any third party candidate, "the global elite"?



(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:21:27 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		both Obama and McCain are global elite.

I oppose globalization.   We have rushed to globalize. We must slow it down.  True globalization, means NO NATIONAL BOUNDARIES.  

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:25:08 AM   
BlackPhx


Posts: 3432
Joined: 11/8/2006
Status: offline 		Yes it is what we say we need, and what many of us hope we will have come Election Day. That doesn't mean that people are going to be happy if it is not their candidate that supplies it. Perhaps we might have been better off in this election if it was done as it was pre 1834 when the person who came in second became the Vice President while the one with the most votes became President, but ultimately they worked together.

No one wants raised taxes..but it seems at the same time no one want to face the fact that in War Time Taxes have ALWAYS gone up and cuts down, save for this time, when we seem to be funding the wars we are involved in on the labor of our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. Their taxes are what Bush apparently figured should pay for the Trillions borrowed from China. Basic economics says you can't spend what you don't have without borrowing it and paying it back, but you can't pay it back if you keep cutting your income.

Much as I hate to think of how fearful and ignorant certain sectors of this countries population are, I cannot deny the evidence of my own ears when talking with people and hearing the fear and suspicion  evident in some candidates rhetoric being spewed forth as truth without their ever looking at the facts. Perhaps I am too cynical and skeptical to consider everything the media or political candidates say is "gospel" but because of that I look, check, read. listen and research as best I can on my own.  As Master says, he knows that if he says the sky is blue, I am going to look for myself.

We are in trouble, as a country, serious trouble and frankly we need to work together to pull out of this trouble. Hopefully, we will.

poenkitten



(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 11:26:14 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		You're in for a rough ride. We are "globalized" quite thoroughly, and it ain't changing---it can't, since the rest of world finances our debt.

Been that way since Carnegie's protests after the Spanish-American War, and especially since the 1980s, when we went to from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation in eight years. Today, we owe over ten trillion, and rising.

Now.....

The OP was:
quote:


Hi All,

With all the new endorsements from both parties, most in favor of Barrack Obama, citing his ability to inspire and unite----

---Isn't that what we've been saying we needed? Someone who can work across party lines, listen to and consider all points of view?

Or is the problem not the lack of such a leader, but entrenched stances?




< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 10/24/2008 11:28:06 AM >

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 12:14:39 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Yes it is what we say we need, and what many of us hope we will have come Election Day. That doesn't mean that people are going to be happy if it is not their candidate that supplies it.


Agreed. For all its flaws, American style democracy beats a lot of other possibilities---even when you don't get your way.

(in reply to BlackPhx)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 12:33:49 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Isn't that what we've been saying we needed?


actually, "change" is what has been touted as needed.  sadly, those that throw their votes away on McBiden or Obalin won't be seeing any.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 12:49:23 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Then why all the partisan bickering about "OMG! This is what will happen if you vote for.....!"

Come on. That's a sound bite, not an answer.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 1:37:24 PM   
Irishknight


Posts: 2016
Joined: 9/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then why all the partisan bickering about "OMG! This is what will happen if you vote for.....!"

Come on. That's a sound bite, not an answer.


Because that is what partisan politics is all about.  Demonize the other side so that they can not even get people to listen when they have a good idea.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 1:54:17 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then why all the partisan bickering about "OMG! This is what will happen if you vote for.....!"

Come on. That's a sound bite, not an answer.



you come on.  your OP is nothing more than a "soundbite", so this slave sees no problem in answering with something that is perceived as same.
 
the illusion of partisan bickering added to the juvenile desire to be on the "winning" side, when there is no fundamental difference between the "two", will ensure that the Republicrats hold office for another 4 years.
 
if what you REALLY want is change and someone who will incorporate Independent ideas into the Republicrat program, why would you vote for either Republicrat?

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 2:16:37 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		You don't seem to get it. I'll go more slowly.

People on all sides have been preaching for months that they want someone who can bridge party lines. Then a candidate bridges party lines with more and more endorsements from the supposed "opposition," all citing a steady hand and the ability to inspire and unite.

Yet, once such a candidate emerges, people--like you---discount it out of hand.

We should be discussing it.

It's not Congress or the political parties that are irrevocably partisan. It's the populace.



(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 2:53:51 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted?
Sure lets look at what bipartisanship has generated so far...

The War in Iraq
The Economic Bail Out
The Economic Stimulus Checks
The Campaign Spending Reform Bill

Not to mention the bipartisan support to include PORK in each and every spending Bill passed in Congress.

Based upon your premise - you're all for all of those. How did they work out?

Bipartisanship is a political buzz word that indicates that there is sooooooo much money on the table from special interest groups that both the Democrats and the Republicans are needed to carry it.

Only the naiveté of the foolhardy cause them to see it as anything more than a sound-bite which should have you sewing your wallet pocket shut.

Are you naive enough to believe Obama is a "bipartisan" candidate because some Republican's support him? He is more partisan than any prior candidate in US history. The only party lines bridged are those supported by failures - corporate, political, and personal. Hell - there's enough of them to generate a plurality - all with their hands held out.

I'm paraphrasing someone else (who I can't recall off the top of my head) but it points to Obama's chosen method of soliciting votes:

When your election promise is to rob from Peter to pay Paul - you get a lot of votes (and endorsements) from Paul.

Only a Bush Presidency could generate such partisanship and its those same polarizing, partisan position that have the race as close as it is. 

Any endorsement has an agenda - wake up! Read something other than what you can 'head-bob' while doing so.

Edited to add: I think the original quote I had in mind was from George Bernard Shaw (but its based upon a failing memory)
 
HA! I was able to find it:
quote:

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
George Bernard Shaw 



< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 10/24/2008 3:01:43 PM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 2:56:13 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

You don't seem to get it. I'll go more slowly.


there is no need to be condescending.  it doesn't matter if you slow down to a stop, this slave will never get why folks who consider themselves to be intelligent would buy into the illusion that the Democratic Party or The Republican Party give two shits who is elected between the two of them...as long as it is one of them.  "Bi-partisanship" is the closest they will come to admitting they both serve the exact same agenda.  Both parties have effectively dominated the media with their over a billion dollars in contribuitions and convinced the sheeple that they must vote for either one or the other...or their vote is "thrown away"/won't matter.

quote:

People on all sides have been preaching for months that they want someone who can bridge party lines. Then a candidate bridges party lines with more and more endorsements from the supposed "opposition," all citing a steady hand and the ability to inspire and unite.


as long as you buy into the illusion that they aren't fundamentally on the same side, it makes for interesting contemplation, doesn't it?  indeed, why don't they just come out and be honest...the election is already bought and paid for...there WILL BE a Republicrat in office, for the next four years.  it has been this slave's observation that the donkey RIDES the elephant, not races against it.

quote:

Yet, once such a candidate emerges, people--like you---discount it out of hand.


what, exactly, is the fundamental difference between the two candidates, to enlighten "people--like this slave--" who discount them both, out of hand, as involving this country in the same bullshit it has been involved with for as far back as this slave can remember...using the same tactics, same empty promises and same rhetoric?

quote:

We should be discussing it.


this slave is up for discussion, but if you continue with the condescending bullshit, like in your last response, it'll make for an extremely short, and one-sided (all you) discussion.

quote:

It's not Congress or the political parties that are irrevocably partisan. It's the populace.


the only real partisan/seperation between candidates this slave sees is the Republicrats vs. the Independents.  have you researched any of the Independents to even know what they stand for, what sort of answers they have to the issues our country faces?

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 10/24/2008 2:59:53 PM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 4:10:17 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Again, you are missing the point.

McCain runs as a maverick, as someone who reaches across the aisle.

Obama runs as an agent of change of the culture in Washington.

Since these are the major party nominees, and since even here we see ardent supporters, this is presumably a message that resonates.

Then we have a host of endorsements from both parties for one of the nominees.

That's an interesting point, is it not? Especially when the reason is consistently his ability to unite. Bush only said it. Obama is proving it.

Sorry it's not your choice, not then, that wasn't the point of this thread.

Complaining that both major parties suck is easy. What do you propose?

I'd love to see realistic alternatives. I'm not seeing them.

But I AM seeing a true leader emerge---and so are leaders from all parties.



(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 4:47:14 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Complaining that both major parties suck is easy. What do you propose?


Unlike you, I don't have to type slow but I'll copy slow:
quote:

have you researched any of the Independents to even know what they stand for, what sort of answers they have to the issues our country faces?

quote:

That's an interesting point, is it not?
Ahhhh - NO, however it may be something to discuss if you had responded to any of the points raised, in particular addressing the other non-partisan 'successes'.

Then again - it's to be expected from you. When you don't have any answer, or don't like the question the response is....well - there isn't one. Not a very confident place to be, but this explains it better...
quote:

I AM seeing a true leader emerge
I suggest removing the rose shading from your glasses.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 4:52:30 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		And still criticism and ridicule, not answers, positions, supported arguments.

Your proposal is that I go research. Is that how you'll vote? Write in "go research"?

Here's the OP:
quote:


With all the new endorsements from both parties, most in favor of Barrack Obama, citing his ability to inspire and unite----

---Isn't that what we've been saying we needed? Someone who can work across party lines, listen to and consider all points of view?

Or is the problem not the lack of such a leader, but entrenched stances?


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 6:13:30 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		I believe beth is saying there is no real difference, and that bi-partisanship is not that phenominal a thing, since it usually supports things that both parties want anyway. I tend to agree and do not see a leader just because they can get other vultures to feed off a dead carcass. I am also third party all the way. I am not voting for Big Government Republicans or Big Government Democrats.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 6:30:11 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Hi Orion,

Entrenched stances it is, then.

She hates, but proposes nothing.

Cheap and easy position--but not helpful.

Live well, friend!

Tim

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? - 10/24/2008 6:35:43 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And still criticism and ridicule, not answers, positions, supported arguments.

Your proposal is that I go research. Is that how you'll vote? Write in "go research"?

Here's the OP:
quote:


With all the new endorsements from both parties, most in favor of Barrack Obama, citing his ability to inspire and unite----

---Isn't that what we've been saying we needed? Someone who can work across party lines, listen to and consider all points of view?

Or is the problem not the lack of such a leader, but entrenched stances?




No it was a critic and a plagiarism of your ridicule regarding typing speed.

The suggestion was to vote anybody but the two representing all the special interest groups except common US citizens. There are many. For your sake, it was suggested to vote for the one most following whatever philosophy you deem important. Its an option rather than a 'drink the kool-aid', 'lesser of two evils', or 'voting against' position. Difficult and outside the norm - but it would be educational.

Obama or McCain you are voting FOR the status quo.

Your opinion regarding Obama is just that - opinion. NOT a fact and definitely not representing bipartisanship.

Were there a leader on the ballot on either the Dem or Rep ticket; I'd be the first in line to vote and support him/her. There isn't - there is an enabler of failure and a PAC front man - my opinion.

On the issue of bipartisanship - for the examples given above and with your lack of response taken as concurrence - it's established that it isn't such a good thing after all. Or do you support all those bipartisan actions? Your lack of a response causes me to speculate that you did, or can't say you didn't because it would prove your premise of value of bipartisanship worthless.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Isn't bipartisanship what we said we wanted? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.219