The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

My suspicion that you don't live in the same universe as the rest of us has just been spectacularly confirmed.

LOL!!
K man.

Last I checked, US economy was still in the same free fall as before.

Nope.

Bin Laden was taken out by someone other than Obama who never served on a SEAL team or planned a military operation (him watching things unfold from the White House does not mean he gets the credit for them), not to mention that the years of intelligence gathering (not done by Obama) that led to that moment were not all under his Presidential term.

Yeah, not many modern presidents have active service, let alone command level training, your point?

The talk of repairing damage on the international stage is laugh-worthy; Obama has managed to alienate every single American ally while making no new ones. Well, except Iran and Cuba which milked him for all he was worth. Let me remind you that a whole lot of countries signed up for both Afghanistan and Iran war under US leadership, but no one backed Obama on any of his military undertakings - with the exception of Libya into which he was dragged kicking and screaming by the Europeans. Bush seems to have been a much more popular guy when it came to actually recruiting for action.

Well, I guess the world should decide what it wants America to be then, the world police that they hate them for being, or not the world police that they hate them for.
No wonder Americans get jacked with the rest of the world sometimes.

And Obama's approval rating is owed mostly to that legendary echo chamber his advisors boast about. You know, exploiting 27 year old reporters who know nothing, whose sole experience consists of being around political campaigns and who work for news agencies which do not keep foreign bureaus, instead calling the White House to explain to them what's happening in Moscow, Cairo or Washington. (All direct quotes from Ben Rhodes and his assistant Ned Price).

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...esident-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...d-has-lower-r/

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/dat...ings-worldwide

You are right about one thing, I don't live in the same world as you do.

[Coco Pops]

I hope you're kidding. She's one twisted b**ch.

I am kidding.

I just want to smooch her.

[Gatefan1976]

First, I'm not even gonna care about the "discrimination" or "icky" or "Gun" comments; that's not even close to the topic at hand.

Oh yes it is close to the point I was making, which is, It's all about -your rights- and never about -your responsibilities-.
For the group claiming to value personal responsibility, you folks show a disturbingly little about of it. The Discrimination, icky, and gun stuff flows into it because you don't like people telling you what you can and cannot do, and in the same breath tell people what they can and cannot do.

It is not the government's purview to dictate the types of cars that we drive. Period.

You can still drive your car, as long as it meets government standards and yes, that is their purview -period-

Yes, such cars can be dangerous. So is any any other car in the hands of a moron.

No, you are looking just at the "crash", not the host of other issues that are in play, including technological advancement and what we know now over what we knew when such vehicles were built.
Do you still want brake pads lined with asbestos in commercial use? I bet you changed a lot of them over time.

As you have probably guessed, I've owned several muscle cars in the past. "Massaged" 450-ish cubic inch engines that put out ungodly amounts of horsepower and torque. And guess what? I operated them responsibly. To this day, I've never had an accident that could be attributed to my actions behind the wheel, let alone killed or injured anyone.

[/quote]
Guess what, I don't care about the safe users of muscle cars, not because I don't care about them "personally", but because safe users are generally outnumbered by non-safe users and they DO pose a risk to innocent people if used incorrectly. Have your pimped out muscle car, just use it on a racetrack where you are no threat to other people and you can actually -use- all that power.
Oh, hang on, race cars take advantage of every single advancement in safety for their users by choice........

[Gatefan1976]

The Government are the people elected by the people to represent their interests to the Crown, uphold common law and appoint trusted people to enforce that law.

Correct.

When I want someone to tell me when to wipe my arse, I'll check in to the local care home, until then if I want to drive a gas guzzling V8 to the shops and back, as long the car/truck is safe then what gives the Government the right to tell me when and where I can drive it? After all they're quiet happy to collect my road tax and the 85p in every £1 of fuel tax I spend every time I fill it up...

See that little bolded bit, that's the distinction I am trying to show Annoyed. He seems to see safety limits as a "drag". You can waste all the pounds you want on petrol "looking cool" for all I care, as long as your engine conforms to emission safety limits.

If the Government had my health as a priority, they'd have banned **** and cars 50 years ago.

Cars, no. Cigarettes..............
That's a trickier problem. How about we ban pubs, drinking is bad for you and possibly others as well.

[Coco Pops]

Hell why would anyone buy a muscle care if they had no intention of racing it or hooning around and being a nuisance on the road?

Sure yes there are collectors but they are very few and far between.

[Womble]

Nope.

Nope what? Substance please.

Yeah, not many modern presidents have active service, let alone command level training, your point?

My point is that Obama cannot be credited with "getting" Bin Laden just because it happened during his term. To quote Obama, he didn't build that.

Well, I guess the world should decide what it wants America to be then, the world police that they hate them for being, or not the world police that they hate them for.
No wonder Americans get jacked with the rest of the world sometimes.

Well yes, that is kind of the reason behind the general American unpopularity. Nobody likes the police until they need the police.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...esident-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...d-has-lower-r/

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/dat...ings-worldwide

Thank you for confirming my point.

The Gallup poll is particularly amusing. They polled "approximately 1,000 adults aged 15 or older in 135 countries or areas in the U.S., Germany and Russia and 136 countries or areas in the European Union and China". I, for one, can't follow that math when there's only 196 countries in the world, but assuming they aren't double-counting, the sample is 7 people per country. They are, in all seriousness, drawing conclusions about a country's public sympathies on the basis of 7 people.

Obama's personal popularity has always been largely independent of his actions and owed to the media spin. He projects the "nice guy" persona and his actions have moved his own country to the backstage of world politics, letting others push the USA out of its traditional roles, areas of influence and interests. The beneficiaries of America's weakening love Obama for it, no doubt, in much the same way as the world loved Gorbachov for crippling the USSR. But that's about as far as connection to his actions go. Ask the "why" of it, and it'll boil down not to things that Obama has done but to things like his skin color, his supposed eloquence, his supposed intelligence compared to the perception of general stupidity of Americans - the same reasons why people were getting super duper excited to the point of staging Obama musicals before he had even done anything as President.

[Womble]

To reinforce my earlier point:

USA no longer world's most competitive economy. Down to number 3 after Hong Kong and Switzerland.

[Gatefan1976]

Nope what? Substance please.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/oba...y-2016-update/
Pick what indicators you want.

My point is that Obama cannot be credited with "getting" Bin Laden just because it happened during his term. To quote Obama, he didn't build that.

True, he didn't build it, he also did not build the mess the country was in economically, but I am sure, and you have proven, that you think it is his fault, so, make up your mind.
Just what is the POTUS responsible for?

Well yes, that is kind of the reason behind the general American unpopularity. Nobody likes the police until they need the police.

So, to buck the notion that I hate 'murrica and all it stands for, the rest of the world can STFU in this case. It's not America's responsibility to be the police, nor the American peoples responsibility to pay for it either, in cash, or image.

Thank you for confirming my point.

Umm, you said people had a worse opinion of America, not one of those polls shows that the world has a worse opinion of America since Obama took office, so............... your welcome??

The Gallup poll is particularly amusing. They polled "approximately 1,000 adults aged 15 or older in 135 countries or areas in the U.S., Germany and Russia and 136 countries or areas in the European Union and China". I, for one, can't follow that math when there's only 196 countries in the world, but assuming they aren't double-counting, the sample is 7 people per country. They are, in all seriousness, drawing conclusions about a country's public sympathies on the basis of 7 people.

Or, you could learn to read............
We polled 1000 people IN 136 countries or area's, not 1000 people ACROSS 136 countries or area's.
I know English is not native to you, but come on............

Obama's personal popularity has always been largely independent of his actions and owed to the media spin. He projects the "nice guy" persona and his actions have moved his own country to the backstage of world politics, letting others push the USA out of its traditional roles, areas of influence and interests.

What are the US "traditional roles"?

The beneficiaries of America's weakening love Obama for it, no doubt, in much the same way as the world loved Gorbachov for crippling the USSR.

The US outspent the USSR, and had the system behind it to do it, Gorbachev just chucked in the towel when he knew he was beat, "he didn't build it", remember??
The USSR was already crippled, it took a political and social ideology not meant for direct transition from monarchy and tried to make it work on a massive scale, and surprise surprise, it failed. Socialism -cannot- be a functional system without capitalism to build the infrastructure required for it to even be considered, and if that infrastructure does not exist, socialism will fail -every time-.

But that's about as far as connection to his actions go. Ask the "why" of it, and it'll boil down not to things that Obama has done but to things like his skin color, his supposed eloquence, his supposed intelligence compared to the perception of general stupidity of Americans - the same reasons why people were getting super duper excited to the point of staging Obama musicals before he had even done anything as President.

So if that is true, why is it all "Obama's fault"?
I mean, you have already "proven" it has nothing to do with him, so why are people blaming him?

[garhkal]

Well, if you were running the government of California, would you want your victims er.. citizens armed?

LOL.. I guess no they wouldn't. Especially the Criminals!

Well, I guess the world should decide what it wants America to be then, the world police that they hate them for being, or not the world police that they hate them for.
No wonder Americans get jacked with the rest of the world sometimes.

Often we get asked to come in, then get *****ed at when we DO go. SO we are damned if we do nothing and damned if we do something.. IMO i would rather be *****ed at for doing nothing than doing something.

Cars, no. Cigarettes..............
That's a trickier problem. How about we ban pubs, drinking is bad for you and possibly others as well.

Agreed. If it was bad for you, they would imo also have banned most fast food joints. Especially those offering the high ass caloric/fat content burgers.. Along with those roadside joints along many southern highways that do those "Eat a 50oz steak with all the trimmings in under an hour and it's free"...

So, to buck the notion that I hate 'murrica and all it stands for, the rest of the world can STFU in this case. It's not America's responsibility to be the police, nor the American peoples responsibility to pay for it either, in cash, or image.

Glad to hear it. Pity though we can't seem to get people to STOP asking us to intervene in various conflicts all over the place..

[Gatefan1976]

Often we get asked to come in, then get *****ed at when we DO go. SO we are damned if we do nothing and damned if we do something.. IMO i would rather be *****ed at for doing nothing than doing something.

Agreed!
Take Iraq after 9/11.
I wasn't PO'ed that you wanted to "get those responsible" I was PO'ed that you (America) LIED to people to get us to come with you. That's not on the people of America, that's on Bush and his warhawk buddies.

Agreed. If it was bad for you, they would imo also have banned most fast food joints. Especially those offering the high ass caloric/fat content burgers.. Along with those roadside joints along many southern highways that do those "Eat a 50oz steak with all the trimmings in under an hour and it's free"...

I want a 50oz steak now..............

Glad to hear it. Pity though we can't seem to get people to STOP asking us to intervene in various conflicts all over the place..

Dude, I don't hate America. Do I hate what it -does- sometimes? Sure.
You have sooo much power in this world, and it honestly gives me the Heebie Jeebies when you act without thinking things through and act on what appears to be childish whims.

[Gatefan1976]

Hell why would anyone buy a muscle care if they had no intention of racing it or hooning around and being a nuisance on the road?

Because they can, and it's their Right to be dangers on the road.
Jeez man, are you not paying attention??

Sure yes there are collectors but they are very few and far between.

Collectors don't treat their toys so badly.

[Annoyed]

Hell why would anyone buy a muscle care if they had no intention of racing it or hooning around and being a nuisance on the road?

Sure yes there are collectors but they are very few and far between.

There is something that is hard to define in words about the aura or presence (or whatever you want to call it) about the old Detroit groundpounders. A lot of it is the sound. A big 454 or 455 engine (~ 7.5 Liter) has a certain sound and feel to it; I find this very cathartic and pleasing, even if my foot isn't in it. I miss that a great deal.

[Falcon Horus]

However it seems when it comes to guns, the left especially likes Going after the TOOL, rather than those using it wrongly.

If the tool misues the tool, the tool needs to be taken away.

Same with cars -- you need a driver's license to drive them. If you misuse them by speeding, drunk driving or driving under influence, your license will be taken away. And repeat offenders never get it back, thus losing the right to bear arms... I mean, drive a car.

the Libertarian party is pretty crazy...I mean striping on stage to make a point crazy.

Saw that mentioned and was like ... "WTF?!? "

[COLOR="#000080"]But Johnson is a moderate (oddly enough). Here's his views on a lot of things http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

He's got some interesting ideas, and also some that are "scratching-my-head" worthy.

His views on abortion and gay marriage are right up your alley.

Women's choice up to the point of viability -- yes, pretty much my ally.

Equal marriage -- everybody the same benefits when married.

Soulreaver sums the rest up quite nicely.

Hell why would anyone buy a muscle care if they had no intention of racing it or hooning around and being a nuisance on the road?

I like the sound of the engines.

Pity though we can't seem to get people to STOP asking us to intervene in various conflicts all over the place..

Ask being the operative word -- it means the US has a choice.
Demanding is different, and just steamrolling in is also not asking.

[Coco Pops]

Ask being the operative word -- it means the US has a choice.
Demanding is different, and just steamrolling in is also not asking.

And you know what? Half the time they like to invade without anyone asking ........

They like to change and topple regimes too.

[Ian-S]

Correct.

See that little bolded bit, that's the distinction I am trying to show Annoyed. He seems to see safety limits as a "drag". You can waste all the pounds you want on petrol "looking cool" for all I care, as long as your engine conforms to emission safety limits.

Cars, no. Cigarettes..............
That's a trickier problem. How about we ban pubs, drinking is bad for you and possibly others as well.

You wouldn't get any objection from me (family experiences, not nice).

So what you're saying is that it's OK to ban, or effectively ban cars, because they're not good for people, but not other things which are equally, if not more dangerous?

My point being not to ban everything that is bad, blimey life would be boring if they did, but not to pick and choose what to ban either based on a flawed political ideology either.

Oh BTW, forget the three party system Annoyed, we've tried that here and not once in the last 50 years have the third party ever gained power, if you don't include the coalition they entered into in 2010 before disappearing into obscurity after breaking every pre-election pledge they'd made. The theory is good, just not so sound in reality.