Craig Read Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Zell Miller a high ranking Democrat has just published a book "A National Party No More", about the Democrats increasing irrevelance for most people outside of Marin County San Fran, Harvard and the Upper West Side Manhattan. Great book. He argues as a Democrat nonetheless that the Dumbo's are totally without moral compass [read Iraq] and have no clue about economics. With the 9 dwarves competing for the leadership it is clear that all nine want to raise taxes, the only difference being how much and on whom. Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean are the dumbest proposing to repeal every dime of the Bush tax cuts, regardless of income. Dean the most monstrous of the pygmies, wants to lift the income cap on payroll taxes, a huge marginal rate increase on anyone making more than $87,000 a year. It would be the largest tax increase in history. That a boy, that should gain some votes. The other candidates would merely repeal the tax cuts on the "wealthy," which Joe Lieberman defines as a couple earning more than $150,000. John Kerry and John Edwards have a similar strategy. In a recent MSNBC debate I saw, Gephardt pointed out that he had never supported Clinton on Nafta, China and other open trade pacts. Dean and Kerry have in turn walked away from their earlier Nafta support. Most of the candidates also support Bush's very dumb steel tariffs which should be repealed yesterday. With the exception of Lieberman and Clark, all of the candidates now accept the AFL-CIO-Sierra Club diktat that any new trade deals must impose U.S. labor and environmental standards on the rest of the world. Since few important countries are likely to accept these terms, this is a recipe for ending all future trade deals. Wonderful mix that these guys offer. Basically; more spend; more welfare; more socialised health care, higher taxes, reduced Free Trade. Yes truly the 'Party of the People'. They should rename the Dumbocrud leader's title to 'Commissar'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 I heard Zell Miller interviewed on another network. What a razor sharp mind he has. He has offered to help Bush in his campaign - the Democrats will have much to fear everytime Zell Miller opens his mouth and articulates what has gone wrong with the Democrat party. I loved it when Zell Miller said that the current Democrat campaign platforms combined the worst of McGovern's and of Mondale's - higher taxes and peace at any cost. I almost dropped out of my chair when he made that statement because he summed up the pathos of the 9 dwarfs' platforms in one pithy statement. Zell Miller's fine interview also reminded me of the differences that exist in the quality of Senate Canada has versus what the USA has. Zell Miller embodied leadership, a powerful voice for his state of Georgia and of the South, whereas our lumps of coal who call themselves senators are toadies to the PMO...they represent no one but their own self-interest. Sad, really, that Canadians allow this group of free-loaders to exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 5, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Good point Morgan. Our Senate and other patronage filled posts reek with corruption, indolence and special interest buy offs. JC is busy right now filling every dark crack in Ottawa with his spiders ie. patronage appointments. I believe that the Dumbo's are in huge trouble in the States. If one goes back in history and analyses their statements, stands and policies - on almost every major issue with the exception of some of JFK's policies and some of Clinton's [due to arm twisting by Gingrich], they have been wrong. They are divorced from the affairs of the people, the economy and foreign affairs. Increasingly they are a party of trial lawyers, hollywood sluts and academics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 While I am a democrat, I do agree that nothing will get acomplished if everyone is fighting amongst themselves. We need one leader to rally behind whether it be Dean or Kerry is yet to be decided. However, I tend to support the view that the Bush tax cuts were worthless. Giving money out will not stimulate the economy especially when Bush gave hundereds of thousands to his friends at Enron. (If you don't know, Bush and the former CEO were very good friends and he affectionatly named him "Kenny Boy") Enron was a major contributor towards the Bush campaign. The cuts were not based on which corporations would recycle the money into our economy, but instead reflected on Bushes own personal agenda. Finally, cutting 1.7 billion dollars in 57 education programs is NOT stimulating the economy. It's actually hurting it. With untrained employees, companies will lose money. In a sence, if you want to live like a republican, vote democrat. In one sentance," Bush screwed our future" thats how you can tell the kind of president we have, one who doomed an entire generation to ignorance. This same ignorant generation is the same one who will be paying off the debt of Bushes "expidition" into Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 5, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Good analysis and spelling. Sure the US economy is growing at 7 % in Q3 so the tax cuts are obviously idiotic. The dividend cuts are reforming governance structures, forcing firms to pay out dividends [if not high growth firms], stopping false M&A activity and tax planning [ie. Enron and World Com]. Business investment was up 15 % last month. So yeah obviously these reforms are idiotic. Roll em back. Raising taxes, spending more and having more gov't regulations and control is the way to prosperity. I agree, all socialist experiments have been great successes. North Korea is a paradise. Please cite historical evidence to support the view that higher taxes, spend, gov't power and associated corruption is good. You can start with Canada whose 2003 GDP performance is 1/3 as strong as the US and whose disposable income levels and standard of living levels are 30 % less than the US and declining and whose corruption ranking is now about 25 th in the world. Plenty of other posts deal with the above issues. This thread deals with the implosing of the Democratic party into 3 basic support groups: -Teachers and Academics -Trial Lawyers -Media It is NOT a national party but a collection of the above who would like to remodel society into a collectivist haven, premised on the EU model. If these jokers succeed in such a vision the sum total would be the World's and indeed Freedom's loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Theres a thousand and one reason Canada is a better place than the U.S. 1) Free Health Care 2) Only an average of 314 gun deaths per year (Compared to the U.S. 11,000 Canada is also one of the most liberal freethinking countires around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugo Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Where's the other 999 reasons? I don't think Canada's lousy healthcare system is anything to brag about - the US healthcare system is better (that's why anyone who can goes south of the border for treatment) and contrary to popular belief, nobody there is dying for lack of medical access. I wouldn't shout too loudly about crime rates while Canada has more violent crime per capita than the US. Something tells me that's connected with the fact that provincial police and RCMP funding are lower than they've been for 30 years, thanks to the Liberals, but hey, I'm just an ignorant rightwinger, what do I know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Free Health Care Don't say "Free". Nothing is free. The cost of our health care is included in the taxes that we pay thereby making it accessible to all who need it. So it goes, when taxes are cut, so must funding to relevant services such as healthcare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Hugo, You're right on your facts about medical care, mediocre health care is mediocre and making it free does not transform mediocre to better. With regards to higher numbers of gun deaths in the USA versus Canada, aside from reasons due to obvious disparities in total population[the US is 10 times that of Canada], another regretable reason for high gun death numbers in the USA is related to the high numbers of black on black crime in the USA. Since blacks represent 12% of the US population versus approx. 2% of Canada's population and are 8-9 times more likely to commit homicide with a gun, this contributes significantly to the USA's gun deaths versus Canada's. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=29329 http://www.salon.com/news/col/horo/1999/08/16/naacp http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/wuvc01.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
righturnonred Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 Probably the most signifcant fact regarding gun control that no one has touched on yet is that, in the US, there are an estimated 2 million defensive uses of handguns each year that effectively prevent crime. A defensive use does not have to involve shooting a perp or even discharging a weapon. Even brandishing a firearm or functioning the slide counts as a defensive use if it prevents a crime. Gun control advocates conveniently omit the tremendously positive effects of defensive hand gun use and look only at incidents in which weapons are involved in crimes or accidents. In college, I investigated the effects of handgun possession on crime rates in the United States in comparison to the UK, a nation in which handguns are outlawed. What I found was that although the US had higher instances of murder, the UK had substantailly higher rates for every other violent crime including rape, burglary, robbery, and car jackings, among others. In fact I found that crime rates are so bad in the UK, that municipal police forces were found to have been falsely classifying crime reports in an effort to artificially reduce violent crime rates. An example of this is classifying a burgarly (a felony) as trespassing (a misdemeanor). During the next year when reporting policies were reformed, violent crime rates effectively doubled from the previous year. Essentially, criminals can have a field day in a country where not even the police are armed. Criminals do not acquire hand guns legally anyway, so prohibiting law abiding citizens from owning hands guns puts everyone at risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 Good posts guys. In Canada petty crime is higher per capita than in the US [Economist world in figures 2003]. Paris has higher per capita murder rates than NY. Toronto's homicide rate is increasing 2x faster than NYs which is dropping. Thanks to our mumbo jumbo immigration policy expect more of the same [currently here the big thing is 'gang' attacks on houses, where 3-4 guys invade your house and demand cash, 3 occurences in the past 4 days]. I have never understood the rationale and support for socialised medicine that limits freedom of choice. Freedom of choice and of service is a primary condition of a well functioning society. Taking care of those who can't take care of themselves is obvious, but there are so many ways to deliver health care that a one user, universal system strikes me as the most simplistic [moronic], easiest to abuse and most inefficient one imaginable. It seems to spring from the mind and complexity of a 12 year old. This is one of the dangers that the Dumbo's pose in the US - HitleryCare. The new drug bill is very bad - $400 billion over 10 yrs in new costs to socialise drug prescriptions. Hitlery must be happy, but this is the first taste of a poisoned cup. I fear that more will follow. I agree with Bush on a lot of things - tax cuts, Iraq, giving France the finger - but spend, spend spend must stop. Rep strategists state that Bush is taking away all the Dems big points - health care, older voters, Cali [he just gave a Billion to Arnie for the LA fires], Bash China [very stupid] and so on. OK be that as it may, it is still not, I believe good economics or good politics to increase non discretionary spending 18 % over 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted November 6, 2003 Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 I disagree with you on the topic of France. They are one of our closest allies. In fact, we would not have for France we would not have won the revolution and had a country. 90% of the gunpowder we used was French. There were more French troops among our ranks when the Brittish surrendered than Colonists. The president of France was the first international leader to come to the US after 9/11 and offer there condolences. France has more than 500,000 invested in our economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 No evidence supports your idea that France is your friend. 1783 is not relevant to 2003. France spends half its military budget on salaries and admin costs and pensions. They have little projection power and can't contribute large amounts of hardware or troops for major engagements. They now want to create a EU only military defence organisation that directly would weaken and compete with NATO. Give me one foreign policy issue in which France supports the US ? You can also include the Lisbon declaration that by 2010 the EU will be the world's preeminent economic locus. Who do you think this is directed against ? Naive, naive, naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted November 6, 2003 Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 Just because the EU will be bigger economically than us is no reason to feel threatened. Americans, (Conservitives in general) are just cocky. The US hasn't been the biggest power always and will not continue to be in the future at the rate we are plumiting. I'm not surprised that you shoved the past conviently aside considering conservitives tend to ignore the past. You fail to realize that everything relates bck to the past. Even us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
righturnonred Posted November 6, 2003 Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 We all seem have different ideas about who has a better understanding of history and the context in which it relates to the present. One thing I will disagree on is that it was not us who damaged our relationship with the French, rather is was them who chose to scorn us. Like America, France is a proud nation, however its been generations since the French really had much to be proud of. I think the displays of arrogence on the part of the French stem from their frustrating realization that they are no longer a first rate global military and ecomomic power. Although its obvious the French want what we have, the fact is they can never have it. And therefore they'd rather we didn't have it either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 The French have the same right to voice there opinion as we do. Both the US and France have permanent seats of the security council and veto power. Obviously, the global community and the UN charter written by FDR and Churchhill think that France has equal say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 20, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 Well you are wrong on a number of accounts. First i get pretty tired of hearing that all opinions are equal. No they are not. Some are intelligent and well formed. Many are just rambling obnoxious paens to ego, nationalism and ignorance. Opinions are like arses everyone has one but most are rather uninteresting and malformed. Second the French fund terrorist regimes including Hussein's former regime and the US does not. There is a list i have of about 20 fascist/terrorist regimes that France actively supports today and the US has embargoed and does not give money to. They include Syria, Nigeria and the Sudan. The French are doing little if nothing in the war on terror and are like the Canadians, free loading off the US. French opposition to the Iraq war was based wholly on economics and money and political funding ties to the Iraqi regime. Third, Churchill did not envisage the UNO being a replacement for state power. Churchill believed rightly in the balance of great powers and of the great nations managing foreign affairs and military confrontations. He would be appalled at putting national sovereignty at the mercy of an unelected, unaccountable and corrupt UNO system. France is a lightweight - a state which is going insolvent and is anti-american for reasons of ego and money - the French actively support corrupt regimes. Should such a rogue state as France be on the UN security council? Of course not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libertypundit Posted November 20, 2003 Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 Should such a rogue state as France be on the UN security council?Of course not. Good call. The French are a socialist parasite. Like most socialists, their contempt for private property, and for the work that earned it, is morally repugnant. The lefties, with their love of free speech, individual liberty, and freedom from need, need to realize that socialism is the path to fascism. They need to realize that government regulation of society is the same as government control of society. Just look at U.S. public schools, whose psychologists trump parents, whose policies reflect the left, and whose history is revisionist. There are many voices on the right for free speech, and for individual freedom (including re-legalization of recreational drugs), and fighting laws like the Patriot Act. What you won't find on the right is the notion that people deserve "freedom from need", or the right for a democratic mob to confiscate and redistribute the private wealth of others. That is fascism, and you are an intellectual sloth for believing that is what would make society better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 The first few posts in this thread are quite odd. How could one possibly equate the Democrats with socialism ? That's far fetched to say the least. Also, there seems to be a general acceptance that taxes are absolutely a bad thing. If that were true, why not have a 100% user-paid society ? The answer is that such a society isn't liveable for the average worker, but is a paradise for anybody in the top 1% of earners. Was Eisenhower a socialist ? Higher tax rates for higher earners were used in the middle part of the 20th century to fund the interstate highway system and other useful improvements to infrastructure. The average working joe isn't seeing many benefits from lower industrial wages, crumbling infrastructure and the collapsing education and health systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 The average working joe isn't seeing many benefits from lower industrial wages, crumbling infrastructure and the collapsing education and health systems. The interstate system works. Any victories scince then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 The space program, the military, social security, medicaid, FBI, CIA, national parks system, department of consumer affairs, etc. etc. We could scrap all these and reduce taxes to zero... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Or just acknowledge that wages are going up. Or am I the only person in North America who is better off now than I was ten years ago? BTW, I'm not a Billionaire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 BTW, I'm not a Billionaire. [edited] I suppose it depends on what you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Of course it does. If one is too rigid to adapt then they might want to take some lessons in 'Flexibility 101.' Positions for Penguin Anthropologists are somewhat limited in a society where the focus is on commercial productivity, however some of the migratory patterns of animals can be crossed referenced into urban and human movements I'm sure. Just need to take a few extra classes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Read Posted November 21, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Supply side economics have stimulated the recent US economic surge. The Dumbocruds would like to do the following: -Repeal all the tax cuts -Increase even more than the Reps. gov't spend and fund it through higher taxes on the rich and business -Re-Regulate [Dean's term] US society and impose Gov't everywhere [read Dean's speech] -Move to Universal socialised health care -Make sure there is no Tort reform so their legal friends can keep suing companies out of business and deposit received funds in Democratic coffers -Ensure that no new energy sources in the US are found [other than hydrogen power to be funded by the gov't of course] so that the US is dependent on Saudi oil -Further socialise the education system and disavow school choice. Yes the Dumbo's are very left wing, and as Lenin said they are nothing more than Useful Idiots. Add to the above the fact that Dean and co. would pull out of Iraq and we have a sad mix of left wing politics and ignorant foreign policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.