The rising tide of left wing extremism and violence - Page 2

Originally Posted by trumptman

Try again. The threads are clear.

Originally Posted by trumptman

I am hopelessly blinded and so are the increasing number of people who have tossed away their support of Obama and his agenda. You can remain a part of that enlightened and shrinking minority aka the fringe group.

Originally Posted by trumptman

Yes but my memory isn't addled by partisanship. See I can recall where 45% was the number that was going to make Republicans a small and shrinking minority. It was the number that barely made them a national party. It was a number that showed them to be desperate, extreme and fringe only a regional party mostly made up of wingers, white men, and birthers from the south.

How many decades were they going to be out of power back then Jimmac? Do you want me to go find all the 'cycles' posts from you whereby they would never recover until they had changed their ways.

Even now we still see the same '8 years of Bush' nonsense to try to justify Obama being completely ineffective. No one is buying it just liket they aren't buying the fact that cap and trade, bailouts, nationalization of industry and health care, and a non-stimulating stimulus aren't doing anything about JOBS.

Here's the real kicker, we are getting close to the point to where Republicans can now nationalize the 2010 elections about health care and additionally toss in the completely screwed economy that still won't have turned around as well. Cash for clunkers helped Toyota and Honda sell a lot of vehicles. Green initiatives are helping us import a lot of turbines from China. We can't drill, build or create products here due to environmental concerns and regulation. Too many minnows, tortoises and views to protect. When we can build them, remember we've got to offset the carbon and that costs money and jobs as well. Hell maybe Republicans will really get smart and note how $3.00 gas was supposed to be here because Bush, Cheney and their oil man friends were profiting at all our expense. Now we still have no drilling, no jobs, both of them are gone and we still have $3.00 a gallon gas. Should I go find all those posts too?

Democrats will have had Congressional power for four years at that point. Nice charts showing the huge spending increases under their leadership will be easy to produce and understand. When Obama comes to power it just becomes the kicker with the deficit rising 400% faster under Obama's fiscal restraint than under Bush's fiscal insanity. Patriot Act signed, Guantanamo Bay still open, wars still going on and no peace dividend, oh and don't forget the expiring tax cuts from Bush that aren't being renewed and can be shows to be an tax increase for most people. Why he doesn't even begrudge bankers their bonuses at this stage.

Obama will be a nice two for one. He will be Bush+ on foreign policy and a job killing socialist on the domestic front who will have made sure bankers got their bonuses while tax cuts ending made sure main street pays 15% instead of 10% on the income tax front. In the meantime I'm pretty sure the 'revised' unemployment results will still be right around 10%. Democrats can argue all they want that an expiring tax cut isn't a tax increase but people will feel the reality in their pocketbooks just fine.

The city is faced with a federal mandate to cover the city’s reservoirs within five years at a cost of millions of dollars.

So city officials are proposing a 12.9 percent increase next year, and a 13.5 percent increase in each of the four years after that. In four years the average residential water bill could go from just over $22 a month to more than $41 a month.

But a new report by a committee with the Portland Utility Board complained about taxpayer money being diverted for things like the Benson Bubblers, MAX and streetcar work and possibly the Portland Bicycle Plan of 2030. The money may also go to scholarships the mayor wants to give out.

Originally Posted by trumptman

John Bedell, registered Democrat, a truther and part of the rising tide of left wing extremism and violence.

Originally Posted by trumptman

Yes but my memory isn't addled by partisanship. See I can recall where 45% was the number that was going to make Republicans a small and shrinking minority. It was the number that barely made them a national party. It was a number that showed them to be desperate, extreme and fringe only a regional party mostly made up of wingers, white men, and birthers from the south.

How many decades were they going to be out of power back then Jimmac? Do you want me to go find all the 'cycles' posts from you whereby they would never recover until they had changed their ways.

Even now we still see the same '8 years of Bush' nonsense to try to justify Obama being completely ineffective. No one is buying it just liket they aren't buying the fact that cap and trade, bailouts, nationalization of industry and health care, and a non-stimulating stimulus aren't doing anything about JOBS.

Here's the real kicker, we are getting close to the point to where Republicans can now nationalize the 2010 elections about health care and additionally toss in the completely screwed economy that still won't have turned around as well. Cash for clunkers helped Toyota and Honda sell a lot of vehicles. Green initiatives are helping us import a lot of turbines from China. We can't drill, build or create products here due to environmental concerns and regulation. Too many minnows, tortoises and views to protect. When we can build them, remember we've got to offset the carbon and that costs money and jobs as well. Hell maybe Republicans will really get smart and note how $3.00 gas was supposed to be here because Bush, Cheney and their oil man friends were profiting at all our expense. Now we still have no drilling, no jobs, both of them are gone and we still have $3.00 a gallon gas. Should I go find all those posts too?

Democrats will have had Congressional power for four years at that point. Nice charts showing the huge spending increases under their leadership will be easy to produce and understand. When Obama comes to power it just becomes the kicker with the deficit rising 400% faster under Obama's fiscal restraint than under Bush's fiscal insanity. Patriot Act signed, Guantanamo Bay still open, wars still going on and no peace dividend, oh and don't forget the expiring tax cuts from Bush that aren't being renewed and can be shows to be an tax increase for most people. Why he doesn't even begrudge bankers their bonuses at this stage.

Obama will be a nice two for one. He will be Bush+ on foreign policy and a job killing socialist on the domestic front who will have made sure bankers got their bonuses while tax cuts ending made sure main street pays 15% instead of 10% on the income tax front. In the meantime I'm pretty sure the 'revised' unemployment results will still be right around 10%. Democrats can argue all they want that an expiring tax cut isn't a tax increase but people will feel the reality in their pocketbooks just fine.

Yes but my memory isn't addled by partisanship. See I can recall where 45% was the number that was going to make Republicans a small and shrinking minority. It was the number that barely made them a national party. It was a number that showed them to be desperate, extreme and fringe only a regional party mostly made up of wingers, white men, and birthers from the south.

Originally Posted by trumptman

John Bedell, registered Democrat, a truther and part of the rising tide of left wing extremism and violence.

Originally Posted by trumptman

Obama will be a nice two for one. He will be Bush+ on foreign policy and a job killing socialist on the domestic front who will have made sure bankers got their bonuses while tax cuts ending made sure main street pays 15% instead of 10% on the income tax front. In the meantime I'm pretty sure the 'revised' unemployment results will still be right around 10%. Democrats can argue all they want that an expiring tax cut isn't a tax increase but people will feel the reality in their pocketbooks just fine.

Originally Posted by Wormhole

Please name a socialist country with worse employment numbers than the US.

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Define "socialist".

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Define "socialist".

Originally Posted by segovius

"A reductionist catch-all term used by wingnuts in order to denigrate a State, person or ideology for the purpose of either winning an argument on the internet or obfuscate and divert attention from facts presented to them which they find unpalatable or cannot understand."

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Source?

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Source?

Originally Posted by segovius

Don't worry about it...you wouldn't know it.

It's an obscure source called "Sane and Rational Observation" - used to be popular but no-one much consults it now..... you wouldn't recognize it.

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Nice one.

Seriously though, it would be helpful to know what definition of "socialism" Wormhole is going by.

Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...4-in-past-year

Right wing hate groups massively on the rise.

There isn't any left wing counterpart to these organised, armed militant groups.

It doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by trumptman

I think they are in their 10,000th hour of Sarah Palin notes on hand analysis.



According to genetic polls about +7 Republican



I think I got lost after the seventh hypothetical question.



Seg already did for me. Spain at 20%.



Is using a reductionist catch-all term (wingnuts) in a definition claiming to define a reductionist catch-all term a space-time paradox? You may have have caused to much reductionism since double reductionisms aren't like negatives and cancel out.



I think under Seg's definition, you aren't a hard-line socialist until someone is being marched toward a death camp.

Originally Posted by Northgate

Trumptman's just trying to point out that his hypocrisy is no different than our hypocrisy.

Originally Posted by trumptman

BTW BR, I don't consider a link to some sniveling comedian and his sneering attempt to persuade to be a "high quality" link. I put it on the Trumpetman link-o-meter and that link came up as "COMPLETE FAIL."

Originally Posted by BR

Of course when you both use abused, broken, and poorly calibrated tools, the readings you get will be way off.

Originally Posted by Aquatic

Trumpt one thing that occurred to me one time in 9th or 10th grade history class was how in the mid-20th century the Democrats and Republicans switched names. Lincoln was a Republican and northerner. Democrats were the racist southerners. Now it's kind of reverse. Of course that is nowhere near a blanket rule for everyone and I'm blowing up the language for some pizzazz. But I just want to make it clear that I realize Democrat does not always mean good, now, or in the past. I agree with O-Mac crazy has no party label. I'm just saying, from my anecdotal mass-media experience, it certainly seems more prevalent with self-described conservatives in this country. And I am starting to hate Olbermann. Even Maddow is wearing me down. I like to separate news and theatrics. Except when it's Stewart or Colbert. Because they are seriously funny, and they poke fun of every party. I'm sure they'll even start to pick on the Coffee Party...

Originally Posted by trumptman

I understand that while your folks are falling 20+ points in the polls (Obama specifically) and while the generic vote has swung a solid 10 points, you want to still put forward the same claims and attempt to use ridicule instead of reason to engage in discussion.







I think your own language shows the problem. Claiming something PUSHES you out of a place when all your own actions are required to engage or disengage the place is just so typical of the liberal mindset. You've got all the answers but someone else is always responsible for throwing all the levers to make it happen. It is pure know-it-all attitude. Only like most know-it-alls who want those who get things done using the method of those who get nothing done, it just gets ignored.



Yes clearly MSNBC and your own reading has informed you well about this when the depth of analysis is "guy who flew that plane." Claiming to fight ignorance while demonstrating it is just embarrassing and I can see why one would avoid discussion and leave rather than keep having this point noted as I am doing to you right now.



Yes and most of us would note Pot Pol, Mao, Stalin, and just a few others as well. Also you magically forget historical baggage when it suites you. You know like how the Democrats caused the Civil War over slavery. Al Gore's father was one of the Senators filibustering the Civil Rights Act. Even now it is happening but those selective blinders are in place. It isn't Republicans noting that Obama couldn't sell watermelon in the side of the road, it is DAN RATHER. When Republicans have someone praise a former segregationist, he steps down. The Democrats are the party that still has former klan members actively serving in the Senate. We all know it must be okay because he is former and still hasn't made any notable "white n*gg*r" comments lately.



Be disappointed. Nothing has changed about me. I'm not the guy wandering in half-informed telling everyone else what to think and do.



How wrong was the effectiveness of that now $870 billion dollar stimulus? How do you insure 40+ million more people for billions less per year and not have rationing of health care? How do you take a program, Medicare, that is predicted to not only go broke as a program but has future liabilities worth more than the entire net-worth of the entire United States, have it underpaying doctors and suffering from massive fraud, and say yes please extend this to everyone and now the numbers will magically get better.

We aren't talking about numbers that are wrong. We are talking about entire philosophies that are wrong. Japan has been trying Keynesian economics for almost two decades and it has destroyed their entire economy and they still have no real growth to speak about.



Barney Frank must be as bright as a coffee table himself because while claiming this woman is an idiot, she likely would have noticed a brothel being run out of her living room. It took Barney Frank a while to figure that one out. Oh, but he does have all the answers!


I hope you continue to deal with imagery. Go to the pretty idiot box and get some more of it to fill in the blanks in the brain. Let the pretty imagery fill up the places where thought might have occurred. Go watch some Daily Show and grab you some Keith O. Let the rants and caricatures fill what might have been thought. Then you can ignore history, and numbers and statistics and complain about informed posts with a rant of your own whereby you have the high ground and everyone else is an idiot. Rinse, repeat, and wash.



True and to add to that, the exception does not prove the rule. However to have a little fun, we can revisit how brilliant and deep thinking all the folks were who signed the petition to ban water.

I understand that while your folks are falling 20+ points in the polls (Obama specifically) and while the generic vote has swung a solid 10 points, you want to still put forward the same claims and attempt to use ridicule instead of reason to engage in discussion.

Originally Posted by Taskiss

" Democrats were the racist southerners."

It's my opinion that someone who feels "the government HAS to help these poor downtrodden people" is still racist. People who are truly free and independent don't need the government, the government needs them.

5:4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.

5:5 Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

5:6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied.

5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.

Originally Posted by trumptman

So the last time you looked into that was in the 9th or 10th grade?!? It wasn't a complete switch nor was it in the middle of the century. Additionally realize that it wasn't just the south that shifted as well. Other states shifted and they have their reasons and rationales a well. If you are a white male you have been tossed from the Democratic Party. If you are Christian/Catholic or, as they have just shown in Mass. Irish aka a white male you've been tossed. The whole debate about the Stupak amendment is basically those vestiges of the Democratic party that haven't left yet warring with the greater party. Bart Stupak is a white Irish Catholic, pro-life male from the North-East. John Kerry and the Kennedys are like appendixes. They don't have a clear purpose and no one is quite sure why are there anymore.

Here is an observation that is a little recent than you in high school. Why are Pat Buchanan, Bill O'Reilly and Shawn Hannity all loud, white, Irish-Catholic guys? They are what have been tossed from the Democratic Party. They are the modern Kennedy's and likely would be in the Democratic Party except the party has tossed them out due to with its own forms of racism and sexism. They've practiced it in the past and continue to do so to this day. All that changes are the labels. It is why the areas of the country Democrats control are rotting on the vine.

Also go back and look at the records of your Southern White Democrats and see if they left their constituents or if their constituents left them. See if Al Gore when from a pro-life man who's Daddy had oil and coal interests to a pro-choice man who is pimping the planet via carbon credits.

I've posted on here multiple times that if the Democratic Party could truly represent the interests of the common working man then they would easily be in the majority for quite a while. But they can't due to their own racism and sexism. There are a lot of historical elements to both parties and in the Democratic party you have the unions within those unions a lot of working class males. In the North east you've also got a ton of Irish Catholics. This group is about as Democratic as Democratic can be and have been so for generations. But they cracks keep appearing and now will really be widening.

The places that are Democratically controlled are simply not growing and are on a jobs death march. Second many of these places are urban and have changed demographically since the 60s but the Democrats are repeating the same old tired lines. They keep blaming the old white guys and in many of these states, there just aren't that many of them around anymore. Lots of them are like California, either very close to a minority majority or already past that point. In California whites are like 45% of the population and white males are of course roughly 50% of that. Claiming that everyone is held back by 22-23% of the population just sounds ridiculous and becomes even more so when all those declaring it are the elected leaders who are now minority.

The current federal model is almost a perfect symbol for this. Our speaker is a woman from San Francisco. Our president is a black and from Illinois. Two thirds of the leadership are not white males but it is just all that racism and sexism stopping them from leading when they have the jobs and the votes. It isn't an authentic argument and people don't buy it.



Except we have two data points and thus can draw a conclusion. You only have the one and thus are the exception.



A good point and a good start.



I save my Google slavery for those who know how to quote a post. You can go to Rasmussen as easily as I can and look at their generic poll.

Originally Posted by trumptman

You know Hassan, when you actually try to make a point, I'll address it and you have done so here.

As is often the case, a single data point doesn't help much so let's compare it to when Obama came into office and folks were declaring Republicans a permanent minority.

Gallup Nov 2008



We can argue about which poll has which house effect but the point here is that using the same poll, Democrats have gone from 54% to 47%, a loss of 7 point and Republicans have gone from 39% to 44%, a gain of 5 points. The support has to swing in this instance and that means a 10-12% swing from Democrats towards Republicans.

You can argue about all the ramifications of that, but no one is going to call it good news for Democrats.

Also this is just one, why not look at them all as can be done at Pollster.com.



See a trend? I do.