Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
dxing
Topic Author
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:40 am

Ordinarily I don't agree with him and I think he almost single handedly turned a lot of voters off in his 1992 RNC speech where he declared that we were in a culture war but I have to say that in this piece, I think he hit the mark dead on.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30906

When it comes to raising taxes I think he is actually missing a tax increase on the middle class some time in the next 3 years.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:42 pm



Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
When it comes to raising taxes I think he is actually missing a tax increase on the middle class some time in the next 3 years.

Correct ... increase taxes on business is simply a rise in the cost of doing business . As a business owner ..guess what ... the cost goes down to the customer.

And you are right about the tax increase ... it will happen anyway in the next years. So now the consumer is paying for it all the way around . Stimulating indeed ...

Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
where he declared that we were in a culture war

DX do you still disagree with him on this ? Just curious . I don't think we are in a "war" ... but it is a struggle of ideology ,, one that is potentially very dangerous for the country ( IMHO ). Not so much on the social side ,, but the fiscal side .
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22286
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:06 pm

Boy, it sounds like the same Liberal whining that went on when GWB took control.

Except the difference is that Obama has a mandate. The People voted even more DNC into power in this election than before. Whereas Bush had no mandate at all.

Hell yes we're in a culture war. We're in a culture war against people who have hijacked the term "Conservative" and replaced it with chest-beating thuggishness. People who would rather prove their might by bullying a small country and waving a flag and a bible around than doing what's best for their country.

Those people damned near destroyed our country and we're in a race against time to fix it. Whether this will work, nobody knows. But it's better than continuing a war that was started on a whim, denying that a problem with the economy exists, and continuing to trash human rights both at home and abroad.

Don't like it, DX? Move. I'm afraid, however, that you'll find that most countries in the world are more liberal than this one.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:22 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Those people damned near destroyed our country and we're in a race against time to fix it

Wow ... destroyed our country ? Please ... we grew more in the last 20 years than any civilization ever. We are the largest economy in the history of mankind ... we have more free people than any civilization in history the of mankind .. more college graduates , more doctors , more scientists , ,more artists , more of everything .

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Whether this will work, nobody knows

Yes we do .. it wont. Spending our money and spreading it around with a wasteful broad brush will not work. It is doomed to fail . And I blame President Bush for starting the ball rolling on it..
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5560
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:04 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 3):
Please ... we grew more in the last 20 years than any civilization ever.

But most American's got very little to nothing from that "growth".

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 3):
Spending our money and spreading it around with a wasteful broad brush will not work.

Neither will aggregating all of our money in the hands of the few which has been the dominant trend of the past 20 years. I know the Republican dream is to have a small class of super wealthy and everyone else dirt poor and relying on the church, but that's not the American dream.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:50 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Hell yes we're in a culture war. We're in a culture war against people who have hijacked the term "Conservative" and replaced it with chest-beating thuggishness. People who would rather prove their might by bullying a small country and waving a flag and a bible around than doing what's best for their country.

And you think militant liberals aren't any better with rampant class warfare? Obama himself is the chief mouthpiece on this front. Tax the rich we hear, despite them already paying 85% of the taxes...

As for chest beating thuggishness, NEITHER party is innocent there. Whomever attacks US military recruiting stations, vandalizes Hummers, or burns down Sarah Palin's church isn't exactly innocent.

Both political parties have engaged in divisive politics. It plays to their advantage.
If you think either party actually gives a damn about you then I have some tribal land in Pakistan that I want to sell you...

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
But it's better than continuing a war that was started on a whim, denying that a problem with the economy exists, and continuing to trash human rights both at home and abroad.

The Iraq war was NOT started on a whim. We can go over this ad nauseum and I suggest you read the Rockerfeller report by the US Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee. We invaded Iraq in 1991 and were bombing them on a near daily basis until the Iraq war begun. George Bush I was repeatedly attacked for not "Finishing the job" by then candidate Clinton. Ah yes, does Operation Desert Fox ring a bell? President Clinton himself was arguing the WMD angle right before he left office.

Bad intelligence and a poorly planned invasion by the Bush administration.

Regarding Human Rights:

Obama has plans for expanded renditions, and argued detainees in Afghanistan have no rights? Also, you think attacking Pakistan on a daily basis with drones isn't an act of war?

Source on Renditions: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nat...n01feb01,0,3635832.story?track=rss
Source on Afghanistan:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29308012/

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Don't like it, DX? Move. I'm afraid, however, that you'll find that most countries in the world are more liberal than this one.

It's amazing that liberals took issue with exactly this kind of statement when conservatives said the same exact thing to liberals during the Bush years. Double standard no?

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 3):
Spending our money and spreading it around with a wasteful broad brush will not work. It is doomed to fail . And I blame President Bush for starting the ball rolling on it..

You're right. People need to look at the Debt to GDP ratios of the European nations that Obama wants to parrot.

Bush deserves the blame for not heading off Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But seriously people we've been in trouble for a long time, way before Obama, Bush, or even Clinton...

Our economic planners have destroyed a good part of the manufacturing sector of this country. The rise from the Great Depression was NOT due to the New Deal (though some policies of the New Deal were effective) but largely due to World War II AND the destruction of European and Japanese manufacturing capability. After the war only the US was open for business in that regard.

We've argued the pros and cons of a services based economy many many times here. Problem is, with all those manufacturing jobs gone, it's hard for someone without a 4 yr degree to get a decent job in a Services economy.

One more drawback: We do well so as long as people consume, usually by assuming a lot of debt in the process. That trade deficit isn't getting much better, 50% of it I believe it due to energy but what about the rest?

Let's be realistic, not everyone has the resources or the ability to get a good 4 yr degree and take up a job in the services industry. So where do they go? McDonalds?

We've continued to expand economically over the past 20 yrs at a blistering pace, but the rich have been getting most of that share...I don't think it's any coincidence that outsourcing and globalization have a part in all of this.

I doubt we are going to get most of those jobs back. The days of producing TV's and shoes in this country are likely over. Obama has it right in the sense he wants to stimulate builders of Green technology to produce their products in the US. We've done it with semiconductors and I think hybrid battery production might be another way to get jobs that won't be outsourced easily.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:01 pm



Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 4):
But most American's got very little to nothing from that "growth".

Really ? Most ? Why is that do you think ? ( if its true ) . What is stopping you from making a biz plan , going into a bank and starting a business?. I say its self initiative. Not government for pete's sake or policy. If you cant make it in the US you most likely cant really make it anywhere. Of course the level of making it is the question .. Some people just like a little room with a light bulb and a 6 six pack ... that's fine, that's great .. our system accommodates them as well.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 4):
Neither will aggregating all of our money in the hands of the few which has been the dominant trend of the past 20 years. I know the Republican dream is to have a small class of super wealthy and everyone else dirt poor and relying on the church, but that's not the American dream.

No its not ... but we do need super rich . Actually we don't want poor people at all .. we want more and more customers. Capitalism requires the upward movement of the masses ... other wise who the hell do you sell stuff to ? Think about it . Socialism required the masses to be static and not upward moving.

No other system will bring more people out of poverty than free market . None.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:17 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
What is stopping you from making a biz plan , going into a bank and starting a business?.

I would say the banks at this point.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 5):
he rise from the Great Depression was NOT due to the New Deal (though some policies of the New Deal were effective) but largely due to World War II AND the destruction of European and Japanese manufacturing capability. After the war only the US was open for business in that regard.

So solution is a war?

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
Capitalism requires the upward movement of the masses

China has a very fast growing middle class. Yay China!

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):

No other system will bring more people out of poverty than free market . None.

Agreed. If done responsibly.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:19 pm



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 7):
China has a very fast growing middle class. Yay China!

Things are changing there for sure , one thing front and center for the change .. free market health care system . Its happening , and from what I here people love it.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 7):
If done responsibly

Agreed , we still need government oversight .. I know that and I understand it. What we don't need is the government in the mortgage business , the medical business and the banking business or any other business. Over sight with clear laws and objectives for fairness and safety is one thing ... market manipulation and strangling is another.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:26 pm



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 7):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 5):
he rise from the Great Depression was NOT due to the New Deal (though some policies of the New Deal were effective) but largely due to World War II AND the destruction of European and Japanese manufacturing capability. After the war only the US was open for business in that regard.

So solution is a war?

That isn't what I said. In evaluating the New Deal one has to look at what actually brought the US back.

Here we're in a completely different situation. A wayward Financial market, lowered lending standards initiated by the Federal Reserve's false assertion that lenders were discriminating against minorities, Americans living beyond their means, and this foolish apathetic attitude towards education in society.

Obama writing welfare checks to people isn't the solution. The government needs to get their own house in order. That means energy independence, spurring investment in technology and production that won't be outsourced, and revamping the education system.

I am sure others can add more to this list..
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:32 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 8):
Agreed

See its surprising on how much we agree on.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 8):
r sight with clear laws and objectives for fairness and safety is one thing

Agreed! Government should oversee and establish rules; and also be strong enough to act decisively and strongly when it has too. If acting strongly and decisively means nationalizing banks - the so be it.

Problem is, the rules of the last 20, or 8 years have been broken and ignored.

There are laws about wearing seat belts. Sure it more comfortable to be in the car without them. If there is a crash and you get hurt,, is it the police's fault for not stopping you and making you put your seatbelt? Or is it your fault for not following the law? Or even if there was no law, wouldnt you wear one just for your own well being?

Banks, investor, speculators were riding without their seat belts

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 8):
market manipulation and strangling is another.

Agreed again! But the government has always been the "lender of last resort" I am as free market as anyone can be. But i can see that unfortunately, the government HAS to do what it is doing now, and it HAS to get involved. Again, unfortunately - but it has to be done.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:38 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 9):
lowered lending standards initiated by the Federal Reserve's false assertion that lenders were discriminating against minorities,

I think this was a factor, but its way over rated. Name one bank who complained when they were making Billions on mortgages 2 years ago. Name one.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 9):
That means energy independence, spurring investment in technology and production that won't be outsourced, and revamping the education system.

In other words... 95% of the stimulus package..
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:53 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
people who have hijacked the term "Conservative" and replaced it with chest-beating thuggishness.

in other words, how did the party of this:



become the party of this?






Cairo
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:58 pm



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 11):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 9):
lowered lending standards initiated by the Federal Reserve's false assertion that lenders were discriminating against minorities,

I think this was a factor, but its way over rated. Name one bank who complained when they were making Billions on mortgages 2 years ago. Name one.

The loans wouldn't have originated if the Fed hadn't gotten involved in the first place.

Have a look at this:
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/arti...he_long_road_to_slack_lending.html

But of course the banks deserve a good part of the blame too. Your comment applies to more than the banks, and pretty much to any CEO who focused on short term gains to the detriment of their companies...You can't stop Greed and that's the problem.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 11):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 9):
That means energy independence, spurring investment in technology and production that won't be outsourced, and revamping the education system.

In other words... 95% of the stimulus package..

I am not sure $8 Billion on high speed rail and other pork laden programs are the answer. The Congressional Budget Office doesn't seem to think too highly of it:

"he Congressional Budget Office reports that the enormous debt that would be required to implement either the House or the Senate "stimulus" would slightly reduce economic output in the long run.

CBO acknowledges that "funding for infrastructure spending, education programs, and investment incentives ... might increase economic output in the long run." However, the bulk of the $800+ billion programs do not lie in these "stimulating" activities; CBO estimates only one-dollar-in-four (this is the broccoli we should eat more of) in the Senate package. "

More at: http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2009/0...e-has-negative-long-run-payoff.htm
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5560
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:06 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
our system accommodates them as well.

But the problem is that it doesn't. Many of those more basic folks are losing (or have no) health insurance. They have no pension and don't make enough to contribute to a 401k. They can't afford to send their children to college (if they want to go) without massive loans. The decent paying jobs they used to have are being outsourced, so they end up working low-end service jobs with poor pay and minimal benefits. So the folks that wanted a simpler career and more basic lifestyle are finding that even that is a struggle to maintain.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
Capitalism requires the upward movement of the masses ... other wise who the hell do you sell stuff to ?

You're right. And sure enough, the masses aren't moving upward anymore and haven't been for a while. Temporarily, it's been masked by cheap credit and inflated home prices, but now that those are gone, the economy is tanking.

Republicans have a real dilemma. They want to ignore problems like infrastructure, healthcare, retirement, education and hope they solve themselves. At the same time, they need the masses to keep buying stuff, but the masses are being weighed down by the same problems the capitalists are trying to ignore.

So the best solution the Republicans have so far is to let much of the population slide into poverty and rely on the poverty businesses (Walmart, etc) to become the "profit centers" for the small wealthy population. This is what much of small town America (where Republicans are dominant) is already like. You'll see a small number of very wealthy, an almost nonexistent middle class and a boatload of working poor.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:07 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 13):

The loans wouldn't have originated if the Fed hadn't gotten involved in the first place.

So you cant name one. I don't think no one can. And poor little banks, who cannot speak up against this mandate to throw money off the window. Poor little banks - forced into something that they not want to do. Not a word.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 13):

But of course the banks deserve a good part of the blame too

How come it never gets mentioned? You accept that they deserve a good part of the blame, bu this is the first time you mention them.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:09 pm



Quoting Cairo (Reply 12):
become the party of this?

Hey they look happy .. whats the problem ? Big grin Never judge a book by its cover my friend .

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 10):
Problem is, the rules of the last 20, or 8 years have been broken and ignored

Agreed .... and it hurts us all when they do this . But we don't need to make new laws and restrictions ... we need to enforce the ones we have. And we certainly don't need government to take over the whole system because some people broke the rules. Chris Dodd and Barney were doing inside rel-estate deals while on banking committees and were completely negligent on oversight of the FM's ... should they be punished ?
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:19 pm



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 15):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 13):

The loans wouldn't have originated if the Fed hadn't gotten involved in the first place.

So you cant name one. I don't think no one can. And poor little banks, who cannot speak up against this mandate to throw money off the window. Poor little banks - forced into something that they not want to do. Not a word.

Here's a few:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...62958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

"Regulators Join Banks in Protesting U.S. Discrimination Suits
By KEITH BRADSHER,
Published: Sunday, October 30, 1994

Banks have been complaining for months about the Justice Department's zeal in trying to stamp out racial discrimination in lending. Now bank regulators are making some of the same complaints, creating a rift in the Clinton Administration.

Some bank officials say the Administration's aggressive enforcement approach is an effort to pursue social goals at the banks' expense, at a time the Government is strapped for money for Federal programs."

More at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...62958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

Acorn also sued Citibank for "discrimination" for not lending to minorities....

Here's a copy of the docket, Barack Obama's name is on it as a plantiff...
http://www.mediacircus.com/wp-conten...ploads/2008/10/FH-IL-0011-9000.pdf

One more on the litigation:

"Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat “red-lining,” a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. “No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,” warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. “For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.”


The Clinton-Reno threat of “vigorous enforcement” pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. “Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldn’t have been getting mortgage loans.”

This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the “banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie,” who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said."

Source: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36048
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:32 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 17):
Citibank for "discrimination" for not lending to minorities....

So you had to go to 1994.. and since 1994 Citibank's has been constantly battered and unprofitable and strong armed into giving these loans.

They might have complained once in 1994, but once look at their stock prices since 1994. Look at their profits in the 2000's.. Did they complain then?
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:40 pm



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 18):


Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 17):
Citibank for "discrimination" for not lending to minorities....

So you had to go to 1994.. and since 1994 Citibank's has been constantly battered and unprofitable and strong armed into giving these loans.

They might have complained once in 1994, but once look at their stock prices since 1994. Look at their profits in the 2000's.. Did they complain then?

I'm just establishing the timeline for this. The Boston Fed report came out in '92 I believe, banks started getting sued in the mid 1990s, and the Fed rewrote lending practices. That got the ball rolling along with the expansion of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

The profits if I recall were from the Collateralized Mortgage Debt instruments they sold. I think Merrill was the most aggressive in selling these.

Much of their losses are due to their holdings of such CMOs based on mortgages that wouldn't have existed except for government intervention. If you recall the default rates are highest amongst these minority owners who shouldn't have been given loans in the first place. It originated as a social engineering experiment gone very wrong.

We've talked many times on this issue. I've said it many times: bad government policy, idiot borrowers, and banks all had a hand in this..
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:43 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 19):

I'm just establishing the timeline for this.

Ok keep establishing then.. when you get to the 2000s .. i am sure there are going to to hundreds of these complaints. Right?
 
dxing
Topic Author
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:59 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 1):
DX do you still disagree with him on this ?

Yes and especially the way he presented it. I'm a fiscal conservative and that speech really turned me off. Liberals like to claim that the right is intolerant but intolerance goes both ways when it comes to social mores. I'm perplexed though at how anyone could be fooled into believing the socialist financial agenda will ever work.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Don't like it, DX? Move.

No need to. It only takes about 4 years of this and the people wake up, realize what sort of mistake they made and vote to correct things. As I've said repeatedly, no single President, short of launching missiles, can destroy this country.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
People who would rather prove their might by bullying a small country and waving a flag and a bible around than doing what's best for their country.

You mean like bombing Kosovo or turning up at a church hiding behind a bible in your arm the day after a story breaks about your marital infidelity?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 4):
But most American's got very little to nothing from that "growth".

And who's fault is that? When does the individual become responsible for making their own life better on their own?

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 5):
It's amazing that liberals took issue with exactly this kind of statement when conservatives said the same exact thing to liberals during the Bush years.

That's why I never use that statement. It's phony and intolerant.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14):
Many of those more basic folks are losing (or have no) health insurance.

Source?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14):
They have no pension and don't make enough to contribute to a 401k.

Again, when is the individual finally going to be part of the solution in your scenario? When does individual responsibility come into play as opposed to sitting around and waiting for big brother to lead you by the hand?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14):
They can't afford to send their children to college (if they want to go) without massive loans.

Yep, no college student has ever worked their way through college before have they?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14):
So the folks that wanted a simpler career and more basic lifestyle are finding that even that is a struggle to maintain.

The writing on some of these jobs that you are most likely refering too has been on the wall for decades in some cases. If you aren't taking the time to get yourself prepared for something else then again, where does indivdual responsibility come in? It seems to be lacking in all your examples. All I hear is that the government should be cradling them from birth, if not the government then big business some how owes them a job for life. All I read is someone suggesting that the individual is not responsible for any part of their life and that from cradle to grave no possible cloud should darken their sky and it is always someone elses responsibility to make sure it doesn't.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 16):
Hey they look happy .. whats the problem ? Never judge a book by its cover my friend .

Let me tell you a story bout a man named Jed.......

What's really funny is that if you talk about liberals and put any kind of picture up all hell breaks loose and you become an intolerant racist homophobe of some sort.
 
PSA727
Posts: 921
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:49 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:12 pm



Quoting Cairo (Reply 12):
in other words, how did the party of this:

I don't know that many people (conservative or liberal) that would consider the Republican Party the party of Eisenhower. He was a military officer first, a politician second. As for that couple, I seriously doubt that they even vote, let alone are registered to vote. Only about half of the people eligible to vote in the U.S. actually do. But as Americans they are no less equal or greater than their supposed liberal counterparts on welfare.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5560
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:11 am



Quoting DXing (Reply 21):
If you aren't taking the time to get yourself prepared for something else then again, where does indivdual responsibility come in? It seems to be lacking in all your examples.

It's not missing at all.

However, the reality is that not everyone is going to be rich. Our society needs teachers, auto mechanics, sales clerks, firefighters, etc. These are hard working people who despite their hard work are slowly watching their standard of living decline.

I know you probably think these people are lazy deadbeats since they haven't aspired to a six figure job. But what happens when these people can't afford health insurance? What happens when these people can't afford college tuition?

I know the Republican solution is to simply ignore these people and let them slowly slide into poverty. However, I think the U.S. has enough ingenuity and resources to do better.
 
dxing
Topic Author
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:35 am



Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 23):
However, the reality is that not everyone is going to be rich.

Nor do I expect them to be. I'm certainly not rich by any means and I wouldn't have what I do have if I hadn't saved even a small amount when I wasn't making much, more when I was making more. I don't depend on my company or the government for my pension, I depend on myself to provide for my retirement. Of course I'm a big believer in self reliance. Even though I have a steady job and am nearing 50 I'm looking into going back to school at least part time to pick up a degree in history and teaching, just in case.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 23):
These are hard working people who despite their hard work are slowly watching their standard of living decline.

I guess that depends on how you define your standard of living. To someone living in rural China these people would be rich beyond means.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 23):
But what happens when these people can't afford health insurance? What happens when these people can't afford college tuition?

The examples you cite are all fairly decent paying positions, two of them are most likely union jobs, all probably have a decent benefits package, and none of them are outsourceable. As to college tuition, that is something you are supposed to start saving for when you first have children, if not beforehand. Yes, I know it's a taboo word in our country but you should have some sort of savings plan set up. If you wait until your child is a junior in HS to think about how you're going to pay for it, you're too late.
 
wingman
Posts: 4209
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:40 am

What I still can't understand is where all these fiscal Republicans were while W took a near perfect fiscal situaiton from Bill Clinton and turned this country into the biggest piece of economic shit in history? Where were you guys? Where was Buchanan then? You guys voted in a complete flunkie who was handled daily in economic matters by an immensely wealthy Vice President who went on record as saying "deficits don't matter". Where were you then?

And just how the *uck is it possible for you guys not to love Bill Clinton more than any President in modern history? The man presided over the greatest creation of wealth in our 200+ year history and all you could say about it was "he jizzed on that poor girl's dress, now he should swing by a rope"...

Take it from a fiscally minded person who votes for candidates, not these idiotic political parties and radio personalities who practice mind control on the mentally weak...the Republican Party, as it stands today, is the greatest colleciton of hypocrites ever to shame the halls of Congress.
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:58 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 16):
Hey they look happy .. whats the problem ? Never judge a book by its cover my friend .

NASCAR nation united behind the Republican Party...guns, fast cars, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, loudly religious & planted firmly somewhere besides a big city....they certainly have every right to get happiness this way, I'm just hoping the Republicans stop appealing to this unimpressive set of common denominators.

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 22):
the party of Eisenhower. He was a military officer first,

Remind me which party tends to lionize or idiolize the military?

Bush basically outsourced US policymaking in the ME to unelected military officials, repeatedly telling us how dangerous it was for elected politicians in Washington to "second guess" the brilliance of the generals.

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 22):
But as Americans they are no less equal or greater than their supposed liberal counterparts on welfare

Lighten up! It's an extreme example to illustrate a subtle point, namely, that the very wealthy have left the Republican party and in their place it has attracted chest-thumping under-earning rural dwellers of modest employment. Also, Oklahoma is seriously the number one site for trailer homes I've ever seen - they are everywhere, and Oklahoma is the most severely red state of them all.

Cairo
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:48 am



Quoting Wingman (Reply 25):

And just how the *uck is it possible for you guys not to love Bill Clinton more than any President in modern history? The man presided over the greatest creation of wealth in our 200+ year history and all you could say about it was "he jizzed on that poor girl's dress, now he should swing by a rope"...



Quoting Cairo (Reply 26):

Lighten up! It's an extreme example to illustrate a subtle point, namely, that the very wealthy have left the Republican party and in their place it has attracted chest-thumping under-earning rural dwellers of modest employment. Also, Oklahoma is seriously the number one site for trailer homes I've ever seen - they are everywhere, and Oklahoma is the most severely red state of them all.

I would not say thats true. There are a LOT of upper middle-class republicans out there. Sure there are poor Republicans and rich Republicans but it is not a "trailer trash" party.
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:06 am



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 27):
Sure there are poor Republicans and rich Republicans but it is not a "trailer trash" party.

The poorest 10 states in America are: South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia and perennial winner Mississippi - 9 of those 10 are red states and consistently vote Republican.

....find the poorest counties in these poor states and they vote solidly Republican, likewise find the richest spots in the biggest cities and they are solidly Democrat.

The Republicans are the home party for poorer rural voters in the south and west. If you like guns, outdoorsy stuff like hunting/fishing, and believe in kickin' ass around the world, you probably live in W Virginia or South Carolina or somewhere equally rural and vote only Republican.

Cairo
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:28 am



Quoting Cairo (Reply 28):

The poorest 10 states in America are: South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia and perennial winner Mississippi - 9 of those 10 are red states and consistently vote Republican.

....find the poorest counties in these poor states and they vote solidly Republican, likewise find the richest spots in the biggest cities and they are solidly Democrat.

The Republicans are the home party for poorer rural voters in the south and west. If you like guns, outdoorsy stuff like hunting/fishing, and believe in kickin' ass around the world, you probably live in W Virginia or South Carolina or somewhere equally rural and vote only Republican.

What about states like Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Ohio who traditionally vote Republican?

Oh, and by the way, 8 of the top 10 fastest growing cities are in the south.

Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Birmingham, etc. etc. are not "poor" nor are they "rural".
 
dxing
Topic Author
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:50 am



Quoting Wingman (Reply 25):
What I still can't understand is where all these fiscal Republicans were while W took a near perfect fiscal situaiton from Bill Clinton and turned this country into the biggest piece of economic shit in history?

It wasn't for lack of complaining on our part. Of course democrats, who ran the Senate for 2 years 2000-2002 didn't force any compromises did they?

Quoting Wingman (Reply 25):
You guys voted in a complete flunkie who was handled daily in economic matters by an immensely wealthy Vice President who went on record as saying "deficits don't matter". Where were you then?

Source on the handling aspect? What were democrats saying in the 80's when President Reagan complained about deficits?

Quoting Wingman (Reply 25):
And just how the *uck is it possible for you guys not to love Bill Clinton more than any President in modern history? The man presided over the greatest creation of wealth in our 200+ year history

Perhaps because he also presided over one of the largest tax increases in our history, wrote the book that our current President is now following concerning the raising of usage fees and filing charges. Prior to 1995 President Clinton was uninterested in balancing the budget or knocking down the debt. As to the growth, it was a continuation of the cycle that started under President Reagan.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:28 am



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Except the difference is that Obama has a mandate. The People voted even more DNC into power in this election than before. Whereas Bush had no mandate at all.

Disagree (cause you are plenty smart so we know you can take it).

Bush had plenty of mandate. Obama is using the exact same language re: "mandate" that Bush did. The same flawed logic. Just because people elected you does not mean they want you to go hard line. The people were mad as hell at Bush, so I would argue Obama has extremely little mandate. Obama could have been a wet paper bag and done pretty well. History provided Obama with a cakewalk to office. Biggest obstacle was Hillary.

So Obama has a mandate to adhere to left wing dogma? Just as Bush adhered to his right wing dogma? It's the same game with slightly different players. Obama speaks of his ability to self-criticize and evaluate problems. But lately he is taking huge hasty steps.

Something must be done, Bush said in 2002. Something must be done, Obama said in 2009. In both cases these men had party control of congress. They both were power drunk. How do you show power? By moving mountains, with the military or the central bank. Problem is, moving mountains can be incredibly wasteful and destructive.

If you cant tell, I think Bush should have done nothing in 2002, and Obama should also have done nothing in 2009. We do not need the govt creating new problems, new cancers for us to deal with down the line. Further stimulus / tax policy I see as a shell for dogmatic Democrat corruption, just as Bush's spending was largely a shell for Republican corruption, his Halliburton and Lockheed buddies and all the rest.

Maybe the govt should just sit quietly and do nothing. Sometimes it takes bravery and strength to step back, to shrink, to become more humble. I wonder if Obama is not trying to destroy capitalism and wealth itself. Then we can all be humble together
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:34 am



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 29):
Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Birmingham, etc. etc. are not "poor" nor are they "rural".

Have you checked how they voted? Every one of those cities voted blue. Every major city in Texas voted blue.

I think only Oklahoma (ugh, my state) was the only state in the US to vote all red in every county.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

UAL
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:50 am



Quoting UAL747 (Reply 32):
Quoting UAL777 (Reply 29):

But what does the rest of the UAL fleet think?  Smile
 
dxing
Topic Author
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:16 am



Quoting Flighty (Reply 31):
The same flawed logic. Just because people elected you does not mean they want you to go hard line.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 31):
So Obama has a mandate to adhere to left wing dogma? Just as Bush adhered to his right wing dogma? It's the same game with slightly different players. Obama speaks of his ability to self-criticize and evaluate problems. But lately he is taking huge hasty steps.

Even the so called moderates may be put off by this budget and President Obama's plans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=1

"Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice. As Clive Crook, an Obama admirer, wrote in The Financial Times, the Obama budget “contains no trace of compromise. It makes no gesture, however small, however costless to its larger agenda, of a bipartisan approach to the great questions it addresses. It is a liberal’s dream of a new New Deal.”

The first task will be to block the excesses of unchecked liberalism. In the past weeks, Democrats have legislated provisions to dilute welfare reform, restrict the inflow of skilled immigrants and gut a voucher program designed for poor students. It will be up to moderates to raise the alarms against these ideological outrages.

But beyond that, moderates will have to sketch out an alternative vision. This is a vision of a nation in which we’re all in it together — in which burdens are shared broadly, rather than simply inflicted upon a small minority. This is a vision of a nation that does not try to build prosperity on a foundation of debt. This is a vision that puts competitiveness and growth first, not redistribution first."


If he starts to lose the moderates, his administration is in big trouble early.
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:27 am

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 32):

Have you checked how they voted? Every one of those cities voted blue. Every major city in Texas voted blue.

I think only Oklahoma (ugh, my state) was the only state in the US to vote all red in every county.

Ummm no they didn't. Birmingham is in Jefferson and Shelby county. Jefferson went Blue and Shelby went red. On a side note, Shelby county is one of the top 100 highest-income counties in the country.

San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta are the same. When you get to the counties that are suburban where the more affluent residents live, they vote red.

Looking only at 2008 does not provide a clear picture either.

[Edited 2009-03-04 00:28:28]
 
WunalaYann
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:55 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:10 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 3):
we grew more in the last 20 years than any civilization ever.

I do not necessarily disagree but it would help if you could provide criteria/metrics by which you intend to back up your claim. And then the facts that will be measured against said criteria/metrics.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
Capitalism requires the upward movement of the masses ... other wise who the hell do you sell stuff to ?

"Capitalism" (of which we urgently need a definition on this forum) has also enabled millions of people to borrow beyond their means so that they could buy "stuff", as you said. With the results that we see now.

Perhaps "selling stuff" at all costs, or only to a very tiny minority of "super rich", may not be the panacea after all.

 Smile
 
NorthstarBoy
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:53 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:39 am

There are some basic things that the esteemed times seems to fail to realize.

Quoting DXing (Reply 34):
The first task will be to block the excesses of unchecked liberalism. In the past weeks, Democrats have legislated provisions to dilute welfare reform

,

That's Obama's "gift" to his base. His base are inner city people of color, many of whom are on welfare. Those are the people who ultimately came out in force and gave him their unconditional support, allowing him to then reach out to enough other groups to get him elected, people traditionally ignored by the main stream party, like those under 35, who came out in huge enthusiastic numbers for him.

Quoting DXing, reply=34] restrict the inflow of skilled immigrants [/quote]
Another gift to another base, the unions. the last thing the unions want is to have skilled foreign workers come in who are willing to do the same job their members do for less money.

[quote=DXing
(Reply 34):
gut a voucher program designed for poor students.


It has nothing to do with bias against the poor, it's that educators hate vouchers. Vouchers put parents in the driver's seat, they can start dictating how their kids are educated by threatening to take their voucher to another school if they don't think their kid is getting a good education. The last thing the education establishment wants is for parents to be in the driver's seat because they can start demanding accountability from those educators.

Many educators hate charter schools as well, not just because they put parents in the driver's seat, giving them the ability to tell the teachers how to do their jobs, but because charter schools give the school the ability to determine who goes to school there, it no longer becomes a matter of 'your child has a pulse, he can come here,' charter schools pick and choose, accepting only the best, brightest, most motivated students, those students that will make the school look good on paper. Disabled or special needs kids? not at a charter school, instead they're dumped into neighborhood public schools. Minority or esl kids? again, dumped into inferior public schools because the charter schools don't want them. Even poor kids, not at a charter school. the end result is that the best kids in the district go to charter schools, and everyone else goes to often under funded, under resourced dumping grounds.

By getting rid of vouchers and charter schools, it equalizes the distibution of students in a district, forcing them to go to their neighborhood school instead of a school across town, and it eliminates parental control over a school's budget and thus parental control over the school itself.

The Times should know that diluting welfare reform, preventing foreign workers from taking union jobs and eliminating parental control in the schools is a good thing, it equalizes society. they do know that? don't they?
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:00 pm



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 29):
What about states like Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Ohio who traditionally vote Republican?

Denver County, Harris County (Houston), Dallas County, Travis County (Austin), Bexar County (San Antonio), Dekalb & Fulton County (Atlanta), and all the major cities in all these states all vote Democrat.

Colorado, Florida and Ohio are swing states BTW and can't be described as strongholds of either party, HOWEVER, almost all cities everywhere (where rich people live) are solidly Democratic.

Quoting UAL777 (Reply 29):
Oh, and by the way, 8 of the top 10 fastest growing cities are in the south

Yeah, when a town of 1 grows to 2 it's the fastest growing city in the country, but in any event, the southern cities are all DEMOCRAT voters.

Quoting UAL777 (Reply 29):
Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Birmingham, etc. etc. are not "poor" nor are they "rural".

Correct, therefore they are Democratic.

See this map and drill down to the county level:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
Republicans are the party of rural voters, who are poorer and mostly in the south and west.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 32):
Every major city in Texas voted blue.

...as did Birmingham, Atlanta, Salt Lake City and almost every other major city (what few of them there are) in red states.

Quoting UAL777 (Reply 35):
Ummm no they didn't. Birmingham is in Jefferson and Shelby county. Jefferson went Blue and Shelby went red. On a side note, Shelby county is one of the top 100 highest-income counties in the country.

Jefferson County with about 300k voters went blue, Shelby county with about 85k voters did go red, true, and the overwhelming margin in favor of blue around cities is the same everywhere.

Quoting UAL777 (Reply 35):
San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta are the same. When you get to the counties that are suburban where the more affluent residents live, they vote red.

No, the most affluent part of a metropolitian area is in the urban areas. Highland Park in Dallas, Buckhead in Atlanta, River Oaks in Houston, the upper east side in Manhattan, etc... are the very wealthiest areas...the suburbs are upper middle class, but not home to the very wealthy.

Quoting UAL777 (Reply 35):
Looking only at 2008 does not provide a clear picture either.

...oh yes it does! This trend of solidifying Republicans in rural poor areas and Democrats in wealthy urban areas has been brewing since Clinton in 1992. As America urbanizes, as immigration trends continue - things move towards favoring the Democrats.

Cairo
 
NIKV69
Posts: 14707
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:07 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 1):
Correct ... increase taxes on business is simply a rise in the cost of doing business . As a business owner ..guess what ... the cost goes down to the customer.

It also causes things like outsourcing and loss of benefits. If Obama follows through and taxes small businesses more it will cost jobs and not save jobs. He just doesn't get it. If you want to fix health care how about letting businesses keep their money so maybe they can provide these services to their employees. This will be a disaster.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:22 pm



Quoting WunalaYann (Reply 36):
"Capitalism" (of which we urgently need a definition on this forum)

Agreed 100% . I think what happens ( I will admit certainly in my case) is that we tend too see our favorite idea in a Utopian way.

As a capitalist I see my way as the most fair system possible. It is a self perpetuating cycle of free enterprise. A system that makes the sky the limit for those who dare, and in turn employs those who don't and are happy with the "simple life". The more the society grows .. the more goods and services are required ..it just cycles ...and cycles .

Where I fail is leaving out adding humans too the the mix .

Just like communism ... on paper it looks wonderful . But adding humans is where it fails .. there will always be crooks , cheaters and slackers in any system. No system can be sustained without the willingness of some level of cyclic upheaval. The problem we have now is that our government is not looking at it this way ... they just want to take everyones pain away. That is not realistic in any system.
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:48 pm



Quoting Cairo (Reply 38):

...oh yes it does! This trend of solidifying Republicans in rural poor areas and Democrats in wealthy urban areas has been brewing since Clinton in 1992. As America urbanizes, as immigration trends continue - things move towards favoring the Democrats.

No, you aren't getting it. Let me try to put this delicately...what do Jefferson County (Birmingham), DeKalb County (Atlanta), Shelby County (Memphis this time), Dallas County, and Harris County (Houston) all have in common?
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:37 pm



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 41):
No, you aren't getting it. Let me try to put this delicately...what do Jefferson County (Birmingham), DeKalb County (Atlanta), Shelby County (Memphis this time), Dallas County, and Harris County (Houston) all have in common?

They are cities in red states that vote Democrat, like almost all cities everywhere. Otherwise, don't know, they are in the south?

Cairo
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:57 pm



Quoting Cairo (Reply 42):

They are cities in red states that vote Democrat, like almost all cities everywhere. Otherwise, don't know, they are in the south?

If you look at their demographics they have very high Black/minority populations. Of course they will go blue!
 
RSWA330
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:42 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:23 am



Quoting UAL747 (Reply 32):
Have you checked how they voted? Every one of those cities voted blue. Every major city in Texas voted blue.

Cities vote Democrat because they generally have large minority populations.

Republicans may have the rednecks from Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama. However, the Democrats have the "cream of the crop" from places like Detroit, New Orleans, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh. Republicans have the NASCAR faction, and Democrats have the BET faction. Both are equally unimpressive. Liberals need to look at the members of their own party before they start pointing out what's wrong with ours.

If you notice, some of the states with the largest numbers of people leaving (NY, NJ, MI, MA, etc.) are reliably blue. Hopefully these people don't carry their horrendous politics with them.
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 2:38 pm



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 43):
If you look at their demographics they have very high Black/minority populations. Of course they will go blue!



Quoting RSWA330 (Reply 44):
Cities vote Democrat because they generally have large minority populations.

Republicans may have the rednecks from Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama. However, the Democrats have the "cream of the crop" from places like Detroit, New Orleans, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh.



Quoting RSWA330 (Reply 44):
Republicans have the NASCAR faction, and Democrats have the BET faction.

It's perfectly fine to point out that blacks may generally vote a certain way, but do you guys have to state this in such a racist way?

At least you are capable of admitting the NASCAR wing of the Republican party, now its most dominant and reliable source of voters...rural underpaid voters in the south attracted to cheap patriotism and the techno-violence of modern war.

Quoting RSWA330 (Reply 44):
If you notice, some of the states with the largest numbers of people leaving (NY, NJ, MI, MA, etc.) are reliably blue.

It's not what state the voter is from that is the best predictor of red or blue - it is whether they live in the city or not. Cities everywhere go blue. Rural counties mostly go red. Dallas and Salt Lake City in reliably red states vote blue, many rural counties in NY and California go red...

Cairo
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:05 pm



Quoting UAL777 (Reply 41):
what do Jefferson County (Birmingham), DeKalb County (Atlanta), Shelby County (Memphis this time), Dallas County, and Harris County (Houston) all have in common?



Quoting RSWA330 (Reply 44):
Detroit, New Orleans, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh.

I'm not doubting the general idea that the Democrats are stronger among black voters, but the suggestion that cities go Democrat because they have lots of black voters is wrong - cities go Democrat with both small and large number of blacks:


(all cities below voted Democratic - black population does not determine Democratic vote)
Birmingham = 73% black
Salt Lake City = 1.9% black
Pittsburgh = 27% black
Tucson = 4.3% black
Denver = 11% black
Atlanta = 61% black
Seattle = 8% black
New York = 26% black
Austin = 10% black
Minneapolis = 18% black
Indianapolis = 25% black
Detroit = 81% black
Albuquerque 3.1% black
Omaha = 13% black
Las Vegas = 10% black
Los Angeles = 11% black

Maybe that's part of the reason Republicans didn't win - they falsely believe it is blacks in the city who keep the cities on the side of Democrats?

Cairo

source:
http://www.city-data.com/
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
 
IgneousRocks
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:06 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:15 pm



Quoting Flighty (Reply 31):
Maybe the govt should just sit quietly and do nothing.

Yes, that would be awesome.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 46):
Maybe that's part of the reason Republicans didn't win - they falsely believe it is blacks in the city who keep the cities on the side of Democrats?

No, its the Latin and Black minorities in general that tip the scales in favor of Democrats in cities.
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:53 pm



Quoting Cairo (Reply 45):

It's perfectly fine to point out that blacks may generally vote a certain way, but do you guys have to state this in such a racist way?

How is what I said racist in any way.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 46):

(all cities below voted Democratic - black population does not determine Democratic vote)

Ummm when 97% of all blacks voted for Obama yes it does.
 
Charles79
Posts: 1119
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:35 pm

RE: Pat Buchanan Nails It.

Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:56 pm



Quoting DXing (Reply 34):
Even the so called moderates may be put off by this budget and President Obama's plans.

I'm beginning to feel more and more like an outcast. The Democrat's grasp (or lack thereof) of budgeting scares me a lot, and the Republicans staunch support for wars and Bible-based legislation puts me off BIG time. Flighty had it right on reply 31: an Obama/Democrat liberal extremism has the potential of hurting the country as much as the Bush extremism of the past 8 years, only in different ways. Can't nobody find the happy medium anymore? Geez!

Quoting Flighty (Reply 33):
But what does the rest of the UAL fleet think?

763s are solidly Republican, the Airbii (A319s/A320s) are historically blue, with the 737s usually claiming to be "undecided". The 752s have a horrible voting record so no one cares about them!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: casinterest and 25 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos