Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 64 to 72 of 86

Thread: Round II?

  1. #64

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    Yes, I actually wish that they would. I recall this meeting VERY WELL, and how comedian/party boss Rush I Want Government To Pay For MY Internet Porn Limbaugh and Sean McVeigh Hannity, as usual, met this effort with pessimism and ridicule.

    Note the date. Obama Meets with Republicans on the Hill | 44 | washingtonpost.com
    Ban, you had to go back three years to find an example where Obama supposedly put aside partisanship? Didn't the D's control all of government at this time? Obama couldn't even get all members of his own party to get behind him. It's even worse now that many members of the D-party are jumping ship, they don't want to be associated with one of the least effective presidents in history.

    By the way, that meeting had nothing to do with Obama putting aside partisanship. He and the D's wanted to do something, so he met with Republican leadership to try to shame them politically into doing something that was against their principles. Pure politics, nothing else.

  2. #65

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    Which argument? The strawman one that you seem so good at?

    Second cahnce: which other states?

    As for growing up, I sleep well at night.
    If you wanted to find out this information, you could've looked it up yourself to prove me wrong. But you either didn't bother or found out that I am right. Now, here are a few links to public pensions in America. These are the exact type of pensions I was talking about. In the first link I want you to notice that it is Rahm Emmanuel who is calling for pension reform. Try to actually read the article. He says that if nothing is done to change the way the Chicago public pension is, that he will have to raise property taxes by 150% to pay for the unfunded promises. I'm sure you're a big Rahm supporter, that's why I cherry picked this particular article. And please don't go all 3rd grade on me and say that it is a city pension not a state. The burden still falls on the taxpayer and I'm not going to google every state pension in America. At last check, Illinois was only 54% funded on its public pension funds.

    City of Chicago :: Mayor Emanuel Announces Roadmap to Retirement Security

    Here is an article about how New Jersey was able to change their pension plan under Gov. Christie because it was impossible to pay for. Also notice that democrats in the state agreed to it because they new it was bankrupting the state.

    NJ Senate OKs public-sector pension changes | Reuters

    Here is an article about California woes. It is a CNN article so I'm sure you're okay with it. Notice that they call for California to make pension reform just like Scott Walker did in Wisconsin. Notice also that the article states that people aren't even talking about Walker's pension reform anymore because it worked.

    Pension reform is key to California's budget crisis - CNN.com

    Connecticut, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and West Virginia are all less than 67% funded. You can look them up if you want. I am done debating you on this. I have provided you with more states just like you asked. Until you can show proof that these unfunded promises will not cost tax payers extra money when they cannot meet the payroll, then you have no point.
    Last edited by quinn14; 05-23-2012 at 12:15 AM.

  3. #66

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    I'm not really outraged, nor am I feigning outrage, I just said your comments were out of line at this website, which I still believe. I've been on other websites where anything goes, but not this one. Things go downhill pretty quickly when f-bombs start flying.
    All well and good, but keep two things in mind: (1) Payton "butted into" this discussion, and was not really a part of it and (2) most importantly, no f-bombs would have been thrown had HE not called me a prick first, which is also an "unsavory word," or at least it was when I was growing up.

    I said it before and I'll say it again, direct your frustration at the person who started hurling the insults, not me.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  4. #67

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by r.payton@att.net View Post
    Jeez fact man ,
    Why so emotional ? that time of the month ?
    No examples yet where I've made up facts?

    As I figured...
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  5. #68

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    Ban, you had to go back three years to find an example where Obama supposedly put aside partisanship? Didn't the D's control all of government at this time? Obama couldn't even get all members of his own party to get behind him. It's even worse now that many members of the D-party are jumping ship, they don't want to be associated with one of the least effective presidents in history.

    By the way, that meeting had nothing to do with Obama putting aside partisanship. He and the D's wanted to do something, so he met with Republican leadership to try to shame them politically into doing something that was against their principles. Pure politics, nothing else.
    I used this example to show that, from the get go, he was trying to establish a different tone in Washington. Obviously, it flopped pretty quickly because of these things Americans For Prosperity, But Not Chicago? - Hotline On Call, Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition - YouTube, Mitch McConnell: Top Priority, Make Obama a One Term President - YouTube, but he's, at least, never said, "you're either with us or with the terrorists."

    After seeing these videos, what chance did he EVER have at trying to bridge the divide?
    Last edited by ban basketball; 05-23-2012 at 12:07 PM.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  6. #69

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by quinn14 View Post
    If you wanted to find out this information, you could've looked it up yourself to prove me wrong. But you either didn't bother or found out that I am right. Now, here are a few links to public pensions in America. These are the exact type of pensions I was talking about. In the first link I want you to notice that it is Rahm Emmanuel who is calling for pension reform. Try to actually read the article. He says that if nothing is done to change the way the Chicago public pension is, that he will have to raise property taxes by 150% to pay for the unfunded promises. I'm sure you're a big Rahm supporter, that's why I cherry picked this particular article. And please don't go all 3rd grade on me and say that it is a city pension not a state. The burden still falls on the taxpayer and I'm not going to google every state pension in America. At last check, Illinois was only 54% funded on its public pension funds.

    City of Chicago :: Mayor Emanuel Announces Roadmap to Retirement Security

    Here is an article about how New Jersey was able to change their pension plan under Gov. Christie because it was impossible to pay for. Also notice that democrats in the state agreed to it because they new it was bankrupting the state.

    NJ Senate OKs public-sector pension changes | Reuters

    Here is an article about California woes. It is a CNN article so I'm sure you're okay with it. Notice that they call for California to make pension reform just like Scott Walker did in Wisconsin. Notice also that the article states that people aren't even talking about Walker's pension reform anymore because it worked.

    Pension reform is key to California's budget crisis - CNN.com

    Connecticut, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and West Virginia are all less than 67% funded. You can look them up if you want. I am done debating you on this. I have provided you with more states just like you asked. Until you can show proof that these unfunded promises will not cost tax payers extra money when they cannot meet the payroll, then you have no point.
    Having underfunded pension systems isn't the result of the pension system (as the article I shown illustrated, such pensions onbly account for about 3-4% of state expenditures), but, rather, a lack of revenue into state governments because of this wanton tax cutting that has gone on for over 50 years. In Iowa, we lost about $2 billion dollars per year in tax cuts, as well as most other states. Billions is far larger than millions, as John Stewart so eloquently pointed out to regressives a few weeks back. Even Ronnie Trees Cause The Greenhouse Effect Reagan knew that raising taxes was the only significant way to bring in revenue to the government. Yes, GOP 'Messiah' Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes '11 Times' Mr. Eric Cantor! - YouTube, 10 Things Conservatives Don't Want You To Know About Ronald Reagan | ThinkProgress

    Actually, a fun little historical fact about my "second grade name calling." Any ideas where I go the idea for that? Right! You guessed it, comedian/party boss Rush I Want Government To Pay For My Internet Porn Limbaugh, goiang all the way back to my earliest memories of "feminazis," to today's gem of "Chuck You Shumer." If you like the comedian/party boss Rush I Want Government To Pay For My Internet Porn Limbaugh but can tolerate his "second grade antics," then I'm prety confident that you can tolerate mine.

    Lowest taxes in 50 years Taxes Reach Lowest Levels in 50 Years
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  7. #70

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    Ban, you had to go back three years to find an example where Obama supposedly put aside partisanship? Didn't the D's control all of government at this time? Obama couldn't even get all members of his own party to get behind him. It's even worse now that many members of the D-party are jumping ship, they don't want to be associated with one of the least effective presidents in history.

    By the way, that meeting had nothing to do with Obama putting aside partisanship. He and the D's wanted to do something, so he met with Republican leadership to try to shame them politically into doing something that was against their principles. Pure politics, nothing else.
    Here are also three pages of Obama compromises that AM radio and Wiretap News would rather that regressives stayed ignorant of (even though the health care bill ought to be a glaring example!).

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...gs/compromise/
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  8. #71

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    I used this example to show that, from the get go, he was trying to establish a different tone in Washington.
    "Different tone", as in "liberal agenda"? Shocking that the R's resisted his gracious offers.

    Since you relexively bring us Limbaugh and Hannity for no real reason (in fact you are the only dude who talks about or references them), let's assume that Limbaugh was made President tomorrow. He calls a meeting of the R's and the D's, and says that in order to get the country back on track we need to (1) institute a 10% flat tax and (2) decrease spending across the board by 30%. He sits at the table with leadership of both parties, he really wants to make this happen so he is reaching out to all parties.

    When the D's don't immediately agree, Rush's people run to the Wall Street Journal and portray Rush as trying to build bridges, really reaching across the aisle, and all he is getting from the D's are inaction and blocking tactics. The WSJ laps it up and prints articles and editorials presenting the D's as obstructionist and Rush as a transformative President.

    That's a pretty accurate representation of what Obama did, how was that truly reaching across the aisle? It isn't, it's politics as usual, using the media as lapdogs.

  9. #72

    Default Re: Round II?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    All well and good, but keep two things in mind: (1) Payton "butted into" this discussion, and was not really a part of it and (2) most importantly, no f-bombs would have been thrown had HE not called me a prick first, which is also an "unsavory word," or at least it was when I was growing up.

    I said it before and I'll say it again, direct your frustration at the person who started hurling the insults, not me.
    No offense, but that's the sort of argument I hear from my five year old.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •