Jump to content

What have the Democrats done in the past Four years


B-Man

Recommended Posts

....why would a political party advocate going from bad to worse?......their candidates are "fossil fuels"........their platform is NONE....and their only hat hook is impeachment?......in my 42 year business world, if a "salesman" uses his primary selling point as to how bad the competition is versus how good his  firm is, he's out the door in a nanosecond......

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, B-Man said:


 

 

 

 

anyone surprised ?

 

 

 

.

Not me.

 

I saw that commercial when I was home for Thanksgiving and it felt phoney.

 

Also reminds me back in 2012 or 2014 I went on a date with a 30ish year old chick I met on PoF or OKCupid or someother website.

 

She was a hardcore Lib and had volunteered or interned for local Democrat candidates.  She got a little perturbed by my political deflections and when she figured out I wasn't a Peoples Party Member.

 

We obviously didn't click.  A few months later I saw her in TV as a "recent grad" who was concerned that one of the Republican Congresscritters didn't represent her values.  Dunno if she even lived in his district, but it was some serious bullschit parisan shill theatrics

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BEAT THE DRUM, LIBERALS

Kevin Drum is a left-of-center writer who is worth reading at Mother Jones. He often departs from liberal orthodoxy, as we’ve noted here in the past.

 

To end this year, Drum offers “A Few Things Liberals Believe That They Shouldn’t.” Six, to be precise.

 

They are:

  1. Head Start (and similar pre-K programs) raise student achievement.
  2.  
  3. American health care is expensive because of private insurance.
  4.  
  5. We have a retirement crisis.
  6.  
  7. The black/white test score difference is all about test prep, biased tests, etc.
  8.  
  9. The 1994 crime act was responsible for mass incarceration.
  10.  
  11. Charter schools don’t work.

Read the whole thing—it’s a short piece—for the details and supporting evidence. It is points 4 & 5 that are most interesting. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nanker said:

Ja! Nothing says “there’s no place like home” better than a good old fashioned Internationalist style apartment complex!

 

Germany+1974+(43).jpg

 

#FORWARD!

  Tiberius considers it a honor to have a Lenin portrait draped over his deck.  More trips to the doctor for ring worm.  Yeah!

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

THE LEFT:  VICIOUS, NASTY FAKE-HISTORY IDIOTS.

 

 

Screen-Shot-2019-12-29-at-23.48.20.png

 

 

Actually, while the ships weren’t owned by Jews, the slaves were sold by African blacks, and occasionally Arabs, and they still don’t feel guilty about it.

 

 

Meanwhile, here’s Karol’s column that inspired the text:  How liberals are allowing anti-Semitism to flourish.

 

Allowing, encouraging, whatever.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 

HARSH, BUT FAIR:  

 

Tulsi Gabbard: Democrats in Congress Preferred People Rotting in Prison to Giving Trump a Win.

 

“We were working on passage of the First Step Act,” she explained, which is “a criminal justice reform bill. It had support from very progressive members of Congress, people who call themselves progressives, people who call themselves conservatives. They’d reached a consensus, built a bill that wasn’t perfect, but it actually made progress towards prison reform and reducing high recidivism rates in prisons, helping people in their lives and also saving money in the process.”

 

But there was one major problem: prison reform was pushed by President Trump. “I’m not even kidding you,”

 

Gabbard went on to say. “There are leaders in the House and the Senate who came out in opposition to this bill because they did not want to deliver a political win to Donald Trump. They’d rather leave people rotting in prison than deliver a win to Donald Trump, give him something that he could say that he accomplished.”

 

 

They’re willing to sacrifice any interest or principle for power. See, e.g., the rehabilitation of Ralph Northam and Justin Fairfax.

 

 

 

.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

STEVEN HAYWARD

GETTING POPULISM RIGHT

Modern democracies are said to be in the grip of “populism” that the dictionary defines as “a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.”

 

Most of the learned commentary from academia and the news media describe populism as a harbinger of the apocalypse, a threat to democracy, and the second coming of fascism, all stemming from racism and xenophobia.

 

 

But just how is populism to be distinguished from the legitimate democratic voice of a sovereign people, like the large majority in Britain that voted in favor of Brexit and, lately, for a Tory landslide whose message was “and we really mean it”?

 

My definition is simple: For the media and academia, populism is when the “wrong” people win an election; democracy is when the “right” people win an election. It is about that simple.

 

(There’s a Yes, Prime Ministerscene on exactly this point that I highly recommend. Key line: “Bernard, if the right people don’t have power, do you know what happens? The wrongpeople get it!” In other words—the “deplorables.”)

 

Hence it is refreshing to come across an academic look at the subject that departs from the party line, and such is National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy by Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin. 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2019 at 7:08 AM, B-Man said:


 

HARSH, BUT FAIR:  

 

Tulsi Gabbard: Democrats in Congress Preferred People Rotting in Prison to Giving Trump a Win.

 

“We were working on passage of the First Step Act,” she explained, which is “a criminal justice reform bill. It had support from very progressive members of Congress, people who call themselves progressives, people who call themselves conservatives. They’d reached a consensus, built a bill that wasn’t perfect, but it actually made progress towards prison reform and reducing high recidivism rates in prisons, helping people in their lives and also saving money in the process.”

 

But there was one major problem: prison reform was pushed by President Trump. “I’m not even kidding you,”

 

Gabbard went on to say. “There are leaders in the House and the Senate who came out in opposition to this bill because they did not want to deliver a political win to Donald Trump. They’d rather leave people rotting in prison than deliver a win to Donald Trump, give him something that he could say that he accomplished.”

 

 

They’re willing to sacrifice any interest or principle for power. See, e.g., the rehabilitation of Ralph Northam and Justin Fairfax.

 

 

 

.

 

Good for Tulsi, but bad for Tulsi because now she'll be relegated to cleaning toilets in the basement.

 

It's become clear over the past few years that the leaders of the Tibs and Garys of the world only care about obstructing Trump. To find out they'd rather leave people rotting in prison should surprise no one.

 

Not sure how much they plan to schitt their pants when Trump wins 2020. But I suspect it will be another spectacular schittshow brought to you by the oldest, angriest people ever to rule Washington.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IDBillzFan said:

 

Good for Tulsi, but bad for Tulsi because now she'll be relegated to cleaning toilets in the basement.

 

It's become clear over the past few years that the leaders of the Tibs and Garys of the world only care about obstructing Trump. To find out they'd rather leave people rotting in prison should surprise no one.

 

Not sure how much they plan to schitt their pants when Trump wins 2020. But I suspect it will be another spectacular schittshow brought to you by the oldest, angriest people ever to rule Washington.


I have not understood why the average schmo roots for Trump to not succeed.  DNC officials? Sure. The people who have their hand in the graft-cookie-jar who were also a part of the current money-laundering scandal? Absolutely get those people.  Federal employees afraid of downsizing? Yup, I get it. But the average person on the street having a meltdown because they have a job, the economy is good, their investments are doing well? Why would they want their President to do poorly? 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


I have not understood why the average schmo roots for Trump to not succeed.  DNC officials? Sure. The people who have their hand in the graft-cookie-jar who were also a part of the current money-laundering scandal? Absolutely get those people.  Federal employees afraid of downsizing? Yup, I get it. But the average person on the street having a meltdown because they have a job, the economy is good, their investments are doing well? Why would they want their President to do poorly? 

 

Here’s a hint....they don’t! He’s going to win in a landslide. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I have not understood why the average schmo roots for Trump to not succeed.  DNC officials? Sure. The people who have their hand in the graft-cookie-jar who were also a part of the current money-laundering scandal? Absolutely get those people.  Federal employees afraid of downsizing? Yup, I get it. But the average person on the street having a meltdown because they have a job, the economy is good, their investments are doing well? Why would they want their President to do poorly?

 

I suspect that, for some, #OrangeManBad is so ingrained into their psyche that they cannot possibly come to terms with the positives going on around them. They'd rather see the world burn around them than to accept that their views are wrong.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


I have not understood why the average schmo roots for Trump to not succeed.  DNC officials? Sure. The people who have their hand in the graft-cookie-jar who were also a part of the current money-laundering scandal? Absolutely get those people.  Federal employees afraid of downsizing? Yup, I get it. But the average person on the street having a meltdown because they have a job, the economy is good, their investments are doing well? Why would they want their President to do poorly? 

If you're talking on an ideology level..... Rush Limbaugh said it best when he said he hopes Obama fails.  Both sides believe that their policies are best for this country in the long term even if the country is doing well now.  

 

If you're talking on a personal level..... Trump rubs a lot of people the wrong way and when you despise somebody it's natural to root for them to fail.  These people were pry fine economically before and after Trump became president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

If you're talking on an ideology level..... Rush Limbaugh said it best when he said he hopes Obama fails.  Both sides believe that their policies are best for this country in the long term even if the country is doing well now.  

 

If you're talking on a personal level..... Trump rubs a lot of people the wrong way and when you despise somebody it's natural to root for them to fail.  These people were pry fine economically before and after Trump became president.

Rush Limbaugh said in regards to Obama's statement that he "wanted to fundamentally change America" that he hoped Obama fails. Obama's goals were to turn us into a socialistic state and Limbaugh had every right to object to that. Stating simply that Rush wanted Obama to fail is not only disingenuous but flat out twisting his words.

 

"These people were probably fine economically" before the economy improved? I see, the dramatic reduction in unemployment and the subsequent rise in wages are no big deal, eh? Why don't you just come right out and say: "let them eat cake"? 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

Rush Limbaugh said in regards to Obama's statement that he "wanted to fundamentally change America" that he hoped Obama fails. Obama's goals were to turn us into a socialistic state and Limbaugh had every right to object to that. Stating simply that Rush wanted Obama to fail is not only disingenuous but flat out twisting his words.

 

"These people were probably fine economically" before the economy improved? I see, the dramatic reduction in unemployment and the subsequent rise in wages are no big deal, eh? Why don't you just come right out and say: "let them eat cake"? 

Correct and I never said otherwise.   Rush was referring to his bigger government policy proposals from the mortgage industry to health care. 

 

Liberals think their policies are best for the country in the long term and conservatives think the same.  There's nothing wrong with that if you think the greater good means short term pain.  Conservatives will tell you his policies did fail while liberals will tell you it brought us out of the worst concession since the depression and Trump is seeping the rewards.  They'll also tell you that the cut in regulations and tax cuts are just paving the way for another great crash.  It's a tireless debate that will never be resolved because of the ebbs and flows of the economy throughout history.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Correct and I never said otherwise.   Rush was referring to his bigger government policy proposals from the mortgage industry to health care. 

 

Liberals think their policies are best for the country in the long term and conservatives think the same.  There's nothing wrong with that if you think the greater good means short term pain.  Conservatives will tell you his policies did fail while liberals will tell you it brought us out of the worst concession since the depression and Trump is seeping the rewards.  They'll also tell you that the cut in regulations and tax cuts are just paving the way for another great crash.  It's a tireless debate that will never be resolved because of the ebbs and flows of the economy throughout history.

 

I'm certain you meant recession there John. But I rather like it as is as it reminds me of the $1,5000,000,000. + that he conceded to the Mullahs in Iran. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Correct and I never said otherwise.   Rush was referring to his bigger government policy proposals from the mortgage industry to health care. 

 

Liberals think their policies are best for the country in the long term and conservatives think the same.  There's nothing wrong with that if you think the greater good means short term pain.  Conservatives will tell you his policies did fail while liberals will tell you it brought us out of the worst concession since the depression and Trump is seeping the rewards.  They'll also tell you that the cut in regulations and tax cuts are just paving the way for another great crash.  It's a tireless debate that will never be resolved because of the ebbs and flows of the economy throughout history.

Just because liberals think that their policies are good for the country does not put them on a equal plain with conservative thought. The proof is in the pudding and over long periods of time liberalism (ie. socialism and communism) have always failed while conservative democratic societies have been the only societies that have succeeded. Compare California and their over regulated and over taxed mess with Texas or Florida, states with less taxes and even less unnecessary regulations. Trump is seeing the rewards of his policies, not Obama's weakest recovery from a recession in history. Obama's policies were right out of the Politburo and designed to have the government control the economy. A pretty good example of free market vs. government controlled economy is the recent push for a $15 minimum wage. When forced upon businesses several years ago people lost their jobs, but Trumps economy has been so good that businesses are in competition with each other and are raising wages in order to obtain workers. 

 

There will always be a little ebb and flow in the economy and recessions will happen even in free markets. There are things that are out of the market's control. The answer isn't to switch from a market economy to a government controlled economy but to let the market work itself out. 

4 minutes ago, Nanker said:

 

I'm certain you meant recession there John. But I rather like it as is as it reminds me of the $1,5000,000,000. + that he conceded to the Mullahs in Iran. 

I noticed that too but thought he must have been referring to Obama's recession busting bake sales. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

Just because liberals think that their policies are good for the country does not put them on a equal plain with conservative thought. The proof is in the pudding and over long periods of time liberalism (ie. socialism and communism) have always failed while conservative democratic societies have been the only societies that have succeeded.

 

The plain truth is that they are on an equal plane. The Weimar Republic failed and Hitler took it over. Uganda collapsed into the arms of Idi Amin. Haiti was taken over by dictators in the Duvaliers. We subverted the democratically led Iran under Mossadegh in the 50s. To say that conservative democracies survive is just plain wrong, and the reason why universities tend to be more liberal... conservatives tend to create their own facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

The plain truth is that they are on an equal plane. The Weimar Republic failed and Hitler took it over. Uganda collapsed into the arms of Idi Amin. Haiti was taken over by dictators in the Duvaliers. We subverted the democratically led Iran under Mossadegh in the 50s. To say that conservative democracies survive is just plain wrong, and the reason why universities tend to be more liberal... conservatives tend to create their own facts.

 

Neither side has a monopoly on propaganda/alternate facts. 

 

That's why thinking in terms of right v left / conservative v liberal is foolish, and only assures continued ignorance. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

The plain truth is that they are on an equal plane. The Weimar Republic failed and Hitler took it over. Uganda collapsed into the arms of Idi Amin. Haiti was taken over by dictators in the Duvaliers. We subverted the democratically led Iran under Mossadegh in the 50s. To say that conservative democracies survive is just plain wrong, and the reason why universities tend to be more liberal... conservatives tend to create their own facts.

Comparing the government and economy of pre-Amin Uganda to that of the US is an example of academic objectivity?  Shirley.

 

Marx's observations of human nature and how it should impact the structure of an economy were incorrect and the combination of the naive belief in them and viscous exploitation of them have cost millions of lives.  Liberal universities continue to perpetuate this naïveté and it continues to be harmful.

Edited by 4merper4mer
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Comparing the government and economy of pre-Amin Uganda to that of the US is an example of academic objectivity?  Shirley.

 

Marx's observations of human nature and how it should impact the structure of an economy were incorrect and the combination of the naive belief in them and viscous exploitation of them have cost millions of lives.  Liberal universities continue to perpetuate this naïveté and it continues to be harmful.

It's certainly a sticky situation and ripe for gooey and/or gummy solutions. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

The plain truth is that they are on an equal plane. The Weimar Republic failed and Hitler took it over. Uganda collapsed into the arms of Idi Amin. Haiti was taken over by dictators in the Duvaliers. We subverted the democratically led Iran under Mossadegh in the 50s. To say that conservative democracies survive is just plain wrong, and the reason why universities tend to be more liberal... conservatives tend to create their own facts.

Ah, you've located all the vacuums in order to try to attempt to prove a point. Name one long-term successful communist country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There Is Something Fundamentally Wrong With Democrats

by Derek Hunter

 

Original Article

 

It’s odd how the political left cheers America’s shortcomings and mourns its victories. The United States killed the top terrorist on the planet Thursday, and Democrats were…upset. Perhaps “upset” is too vague, they were a combination of angry and scared. They were angry that President Trump ordered an air strike on Qassem Soleimani, a man responsible for the deaths of more than 600 American soldiers and thousands more wounded. They tried to pretend they were glad he was dead, that he deserved to die, but their quick condemnation of the action that took him out exposed what they were really thinking.

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, B-Man said:

There Is Something Fundamentally Wrong With Democrats

by Derek Hunter

 

Original Article

 

It’s odd how the political left cheers America’s shortcomings and mourns its victories. The United States killed the top terrorist on the planet Thursday, and Democrats were…upset. Perhaps “upset” is too vague, they were a combination of angry and scared. They were angry that President Trump ordered an air strike on Qassem Soleimani, a man responsible for the deaths of more than 600 American soldiers and thousands more wounded. They tried to pretend they were glad he was dead, that he deserved to die, but their quick condemnation of the action that took him out exposed what they were really thinking.

 

 

.

From your link:

 

Obama got his deal with Iran (ensuring they wouldn’t develop a nuke until enough time had passed that he wouldn’t get the blame when they did), a deal that included the lifting of sanctions against Soleimani personally, making his life infinitely better while he continued to mastermind the murder of more Americans and innocent people in the region. 

It was a deal with the devil for a foreign policy legacy and to shore up his shortcomings in the area and a failed stint as Secretary of State for his chosen successor. It was purely and nakedly political, and the people fretting now were cheering then. 

The death of Soleimani is a victory for the world, and Donald Trump did it. All Barack Obama did was give Iran enough cash to fund their terror chief’s actions. Donald Trump put him out of business.

All the pearl-clutching over the idea that this could lead to war with Iran is ridiculous. Leftists like to pretend Iran is a serious military power, but outside their weak neighbors, they are not. 

In 1990, and again in 2003, we were inundated with stories of how strong the Iraqi military was; how both impending fights were going too long and protracted, and could go either way. We rolled over them, both times. Politicians lost the aftermath, but the fighting was a decisive victory. That Iraqi military, particularly the 1990 version, had fought the Iranian military to a draw for nearly a decade. Being the strongest military in the region means little against the strongest military in the history of the planet. 

We should be weary of pushing regime change in Iran for the simple reason that the politicians here would screw it up the way they always have, but have no doubt that our military could wipe the sand with the Iranian military, if they had to. Iran knows this. 

a7a051b8-13bf-4f28-8bb1-ec7f87342a40.png
Recommended
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...