OT: Both parties are the same

[admin]

Yeah, right.

The purchase of political influence is the core problem in our government today. There’s plenty of it on both sides: corporations on the right, unions on the left.

Although there are reasonable points of debate about who can donate and how much, there should be no debate about disclosure and transparency in campaign finance. And this is where we see the two sides diverge:

The ability to follow the money has never been this important since the bagman days of the Watergate scandal. But when the Democratic Senate majority made a fresh attempt to enact a disclosure bill on Monday, the measure was immediately filibustered to death by Republicans, like other versions.

Still, the vote was a chance for the public to see who stands for and against such basic transparency in political spending. The answer: not one Republican showed the courage to break ranks and speak up for disclosure.

[Coronita]

Really? You think? Shocking isn’t it?

[briansd1]

Shocking? No. But not at all surprising coming from the right.

The parties are not the same. People who argue that the parties are the same are conservatives who can no longer support the Republicans.

If you really believe that the parties are the same, then you should indifferent as to who wins.

Talking about disclosure, we have Mitt Romney who refuses to disclose anything more than 2010 and 2011 tax returns. I smell a rat.

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]Shocking? No. But not at all surprising coming from the right.

The parties are not the same. People who argue that the parties are the same are conservatives who can no longer support the Republicans.

If you really believe that the parties are the same, then you should indifferent as to who wins.

Talking about disclosure, we have Mitt Romney who refuses to disclose anything more than 2010 and 2011 tax returns. I smell a rat.[/quote]

I vote for the person who is opposite of the party that dominates Congress. That way nothing gets done. Looks like it will be Obama this time, but I hope GOP wipes the floor in Congress.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
I vote for the person who is opposite of the party that dominates Congress. That way nothing gets done. Looks like it will be Obama this time, but I hope GOP wipes the floor in Congress.[/quote]

Ok, that might work out fine for you… but you can’t argue that the parties are the same.

The way things are going, with changing demographics, the Republicans will be hard-pressed to win presidential elections in the future. That’s a good thing, IMO.

If the major metropolitan areas of the coasts are so bad, I invite those who are aligned red to move to the fly-over states. They are called fly-over for a reason.

[Anonymous]

[quote=flu]I vote for the person who is opposite of the party that dominates Congress. That way nothing gets done.[/quote]

Balance is a good thing. It leads to compromise, and our history has a good record of success through compromise.

But one party no longer believes in compromise. We have obstructionism and gridlock.

There is appeal in the idea that “nothing gets done,” because what you probably mean is “nothing extreme gets done” when there is balance.

We now have a situation where nothing gets done, and nothing can be done because of the intransigent fanaticism of one side.

Not a good thing in a time where stuff needs to get done.

[Hobie]

Where did all the ‘good’ Democrats go? Kennedy, Johnson, etc.

Can’t believe I said that! But there was much more give and take back then.

Not sure you can limit the argument to party specific rather than the people within. Show me some visionaries!

[briansd1]

Yes, let’s bring back the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson, minus the Vietnam War.

[ucodegen]

[quote=briansd1]Talking about disclosure, we have Mitt Romney who refuses to disclose anything more than 2010 and 2011 tax returns. I smell a rat.[/quote]
.. really?? ok, that means that Clinton is a real rat because he did NOT release any tax info before his presidency – president in 1992.. first released tax report – 1992.

How about Jimmy Carter.. presidency 1977, first released tax report 1977.

Presidential/Vice Presidential candidates: McCain, Palin released 2 years of tax reports previous to their run – which is the same number of years that Romney is releasing. Romney is also releasing info from their Trust, which I suspect no politician has. Hillary Clinton released no tax info during her presidential run…

Just can the partisan crap. This is a fishing expedition by the democratic party because Obama’s record is not playing to the public very well, so lets distract the public.

It is and always has been.. the Economy and Jobs.

[ucodegen]

[quote=briansd1]If the major metropolitan areas of the coasts are so bad, I invite those who are aligned red to move to the fly-over states. They are called fly-over for a reason.[/quote]Humm.. these same flyover states that produce most of the food you eat??

Most of the people from those area are very hard working.. they have red necks for a reason. Because they are bent over and working in the hot sun.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=briansd1]

If the major metropolitan areas of the coasts are so bad, I invite those who are aligned red to move to the fly-over states. They are called fly-over for a reason.[/quote]

Because the people saying it are ignorant and have erroneous sense of superiority.

[ocrenter]

[quote=harvey][quote=flu]I vote for the person who is opposite of the party that dominates Congress. That way nothing gets done.[/quote]

Balance is a good thing. It leads to compromise, and our history has a good record of success through compromise.

But one party no longer believes in compromise. We have obstructionism and gridlock.

There is appeal in the idea that “nothing gets done,” because what you probably mean is “nothing extreme gets done” when there is balance.

We now have a situation where nothing gets done, and nothing can be done because of the intransigent fanaticism of one side.

Not a good thing in a time where stuff needs to get done.[/quote]

agree. unfortunately the right from down at grass root straight up to congress is in full on extremism mode. for the first time in many moons I tuned to a local talk station a few days ago, first thing I heard is a convo complaining about the “wishy washy” moderates and how there needs to be a full frontal assault by the right. back to NPR I went.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ucodegen][quote=briansd1]Talking about disclosure, we have Mitt Romney who refuses to disclose anything more than 2010 and 2011 tax returns. I smell a rat.[/quote]
.. really?? ok, that means that Clinton is a real rat because he did NOT release any tax info before his presidency – president in 1992.. first released tax report – 1992.

How about Jimmy Carter.. presidency 1977, first released tax report 1977.

Presidential/Vice Presidential candidates: McCain, Palin released 2 years of tax reports previous to their run – which is the same number of years that Romney is releasing. Romney is also releasing info from their Trust, which I suspect no politician has. Hillary Clinton released no tax info during her presidential run…

Just can the partisan crap. This is a fishing expedition by the democratic party because Obama’s record is not playing to the public very well, so lets distract the public.

It is and always has been.. the Economy and Jobs.[/quote]

agree the tax return thing is all politics. hence Romney needs to just release the tax info and take a hit for a couple of weeks and move on. otherwise this thing is going to keep haunting him. one big problem is you got the ghost of George Romney’s quote “One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show.” how do you fight against that?!

as for economy and jobs. I doubt either Romney nor Obama can do much with the economic trend.

in the developing world, government policies is vital for the economy. in the developed world, government policies at best changes the slope of the up and down sine wave.

so it really isn’t about economy and jobs.

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen].. really?? ok, that means that Clinton is a real rat because he did NOT release any tax info before his presidency – president in 1992.. first released tax report – 1992.

How about Jimmy Carter.. presidency 1977, first released tax report 1977.

Presidential/Vice Presidential candidates: McCain, Palin released 2 years of tax reports previous to their run – which is the same number of years that Romney is releasing. Romney is also releasing info from their Trust, which I suspect no politician has. Hillary Clinton released no tax info during her presidential run…

Just can the partisan crap. This is a fishing expedition by the democratic party […][/quote]

Talk about fishing expeditions. Going back to 1992 – two decades – to find a counter-example?

And Hilary never received a party nomination. You’re fishing in the wrong pond…

Romney’s financial situation is relevant, because his business experience is in a field that provides dubious benefits to the American economy and the middle-class American worker.

American voters do want to know about his offshore bank accounts, etc. He doesn’t have to disclose everything, but if he refuses it will be at his own peril.

My original post is actually about congress and the senate. The fact that Republican legislators consistently vote as one single mind. None of them ever seem cross party lines, no matter what the issue. They always vote consistently, and they always vote “no.”

Why is that?

[ucodegen]

[quote ocrenter]agree the tax return thing is all politics. hence Romney needs to just release the tax info and take a hit for a couple of weeks and move on. otherwise this thing is going to keep haunting him. one big problem is you got the ghost of George Romney’s quote “One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show.” how do you fight against that?[/quote]The problem is that it opens the whole thing to a fishing contest. Romney makes most of his income from Investments. 2008 was a very bad year for investments and any smart tax planner would use the losses of 2008 to cancel any gains in 2009 and after if possible. I think the Obama campaign is trying to bring up that Romney didn’t pay taxes in 2009 (because of investment losses). This is likely to play well people who don’t understand saving and investing, and will make a good ‘sound bite’ and diversion from the facts and presidential performance. The problem is that the previous election, very few Democrat Presidential hopefuls revealed their tax returns. Almost all of the Republican hopefuls revealed 2 years. One needs to ask: What is the real point of this requirement?

In the previous election, Obama brought President Bush to task on his record. It is now Obama’s turn to face his record and he does not want to.

[quote ocrenter]in the developing world, government policies is vital for the economy. in the developed world, government policies at best changes the slope of the up and down sine wave.

so it really isn’t about economy and jobs.[/quote]
I would have to disagree with you on these. The statement that gov policies don’t matter in the developed world does not stand up to facts nor is supported by evidence. A simple change in government policies and create or destroy entire businesses in the developed world. NOTE: Creation of all of the security businesses, TSA etc. NOTE: The overturn of standard business bankruptcy rules in the GM BK, and how it has now caused lenders to not want to pick up corp bonds… making financing tighter for any businesses.

[quote harvey]Talk about fishing expeditions. Going back to 1992 – two decades – to find a counter-example?[/quote] Last time I checked, we don’t vote for the next president every year… So I had to go back through records. I also brought up that Hillary Clinton did NOT reveal any tax records on her run, while the Repub presidential hopefuls did. Now you decide that you yourself have the right to limit it to party selects? sorry, the world doesn’t work that way. If you look through history, you will find that few presidents ever revealed that info:
http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/

Why is this new thing becoming the norm?? because it diverts from the facts.

[quote harvey]Romney’s financial situation is relevant, because his business experience is in a field that provides dubious benefits to the American economy and the middle-class American worker.[/quote]This could be a valid subject EXCEPT that his tax records will not reveal that. Instead, go after the history of Bain Capital. Also remember that Warren Buffet closed the original company that was Berkshire Hathaway.. and all those jobs went away. Do you remember what that company was?

[quote harvey]My original post is actually about congress and the senate. The fact that Republican legislators consistently vote as one single mind. [/quote]Not supported by facts in evidence and both parties are presently trying to force their elected members to vote along party lines – Democrat and Republican both.

[Author]

Posts