I say in every post what I think. I don't shy away from spirited debates. That's why I'm here. I believe strongly in conservative values because they work and have been proven again and again to work. But when greeted with the nonsense from you and others, the conversation breaks down. For instance, you mentioned Bushes messes and listed the economy, social security reform....etc etc. The war can be debated yes. But the economy is thriving. I mean do you get the economic reports? I mean that is not something that can be debated really. And Bush made every attempt to get people's ideas from Congress on Social Security reform.......but the Dem's just shouted down his plan. He gave a special press conference on it where he begged for ideas from the Dem's....or anyone. Pelosi and her clan never gave one answer. So to say that social security is one of his messes is like blaming Pearl Harbor on him. Your and many other's hatred for Bush has clouded your landscape. And when that happens, that's when no debate is possible. Just like what happened with Clinton and the Republicans. It's over and I think unless we debate Vietnam or the French and Indian war, there's nothing really to talk about when your apparent hatred has you blinded from the facts.....like social security and the economy. I am the most agreeable and open for debate guy I know. But you won't give anything to Bush and if that's the case, there's nothing to debate. That's why everything comes down in the end like it does. Ignore me. Rex is ignored but posts what he thinks.......obviously he hangs with Oliver Stone though.
So do I, LC. So do I. I you want to get down to details, then make some detailed points. If I have any thing to offer I will give them. Yes these things can be debated about and already have here many times. Bush's attempt on social security reform was a fiasco and everybody agrees, including the conservatives. That is what I was referring to and you know it. OK. Here is a prime example of what I'm talking about. You can't show me ONE SINGLE POST where I have said that I hate George Bush. Not one. It so happens that I don't hate George Bush. I just think he is an incompetent president. You are making assumptions about me that you know nothing about. I think George Bush is a likeable fellow, I wouldn't mind going fishing with him. You are wrong to think that anybody who criticises the policies of George Bush is motivated by hate. The hateful rhetoric is not coming from my posts, but from yours. You tell me that I'm blinded to the facts, but you have not bothered to post any facts that I can dispute. The only debate you seem to accept is with someone that agrees with you wholeheartedly.
It was a fiasco, but not because of Bush. He recognizes problems with the future of SS and threw out suggestions, while seeking input from the other side. The Dems would have none of it, choosing to bury their heads in the sand and pretending nothing is wrong. No way they will come up with anything that might make Bush look good. Better to run the system into the ground than to chance a victory for the President.
See this has it exactly........SabanFan It was a fiasco, but not because of Bush. He recognizes problems with the future of SS and threw out suggestions, while seeking input from the other side. The Dems would have none of it, choosing to bury their heads in the sand and pretending nothing is wrong. No way they will come up with anything that might make Bush look good. Better to run the system into the ground than to chance a victory for the President. You said Social Security as one of Bushes messes. I disagree Red. He tried to see if a fix was possible and the opposition, based on their hatred, would have none of it and wouldn't offer any solutions. Call them out for their fiasco on social security. I don't need anyone to agree with me. I know what I believe in......I believe in the privatization of just about everything in Washington including social security. If you disagree, let's talk about your plan. That's what Bush did and he got attacked for it........just like on here. You attack his policies and offer no solution of your own. No one offers any solutions except Bush and the Republicans. Everything is debateable but the Dem's debate nothing. They don't like something, filibuster it. A bunch of words doesn't mean anything was said.
Well, that's politics. Like when the republicans stonewalled Clinton's Health Care reform plan. The rival party tends to fight plans that fly in the face of their philosophy. This is a result of the increasing polarization of the parties who are each controlled by the radical elements among them. They would rather follow their ideology than to be successful. This is why I follow an independent course and will belong to no party.
This is where i think you are confused a little. Bill Clinton was a liberal too he just had no moral fiber and was willing to sell his soul to the devil to get things done. That is why people think of him as a moderate. The Republicans knew that about him and that is why they could meet him in the middle once in awhile. Dont kid yourself on Hilary being moderate. Now even a lizard will change its color to protect itself but it is still a lizard and sticks its tongue out to see which way the wind is blowing.
Disagreement is not hatred. Where do you get this hatred thing? His solution was a poor fix that was not supported by The American Public and the democrats recognized that . . . the republicans did not. It is the republicans who are in currently power. In the White House, in the Congress, and in the Supreme Court. It is this administration's job to come up with workable plans that are acceptable to the public. It is not my job. The Dems cannot get one of their plans (and they do have plans--look them up) considered until they get back into the White House. And going along with the majority public view is a good way to get back into the White house and the Congress. Bush is overreaching on Social Security and the public just ain't buying it. His privatization "cure" would cost 3 trillion more dollars than leaving it alone. This guy keeps raising costs while cutting income as if nobody will ever have to pay for anything. You accuse me of having made no "legitimate" posts in this forum. You say that I have no "plans" of my own. With all due respect, I say you haven't bothered to check and you are incorrect. Try reading this thread where we discussed the issue at length last spring. You will see that I do have opinions and suggestions in about a dozen posts. A lot of us do. Please--read them. I'm not avoiding your challenge, I just hate repeating myself to those who have heard my positions before. Privatize Social Security Here is just my first post, to get your interest. There are better ones in the thread. __________________
They had a good bit of help from democrats as well, not to mention Clinton's other distractions. A rather long but interesting timeline on the subject shows there was much more to it than simply republicans stonewalling a democrat, then again socialism should fly directly in the faces of all Americans, yet sadly it does not. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page1.html
Right, Red. And it's also the President's perogative to pick his own Supreme Court Justices but, suddenly, the Dems have plenty to say. That was exactly my point. I see you agree in an earlier post. Partisan politics are ruining this country. What killed the privatization proposal was the outcry from millions of ignorant (not dumb) people who have no concept of annuities and saving for the future. It's like structured settlements. Over the past 15 years, many, many big dollar insurance settlements were structured to ensure guaranteed income over a person's lifetime. Now, the laws have changed allowing people to cash out the structures at a severe penalty. The financially unsavvy victims are pocketing a lump sum which will be gone in 5 years, then they will scream at the government for letting it happen. Bush's plan would have protected many from their own ignorance.
That was Hillary's Nation Healthcare plan. It was a joke anyway and they both knew it. They threw it out there with no specifics on costs, benefits people went nuts and faster than they brought it up, they dropped it. Bush was known for working with both sides in Texas and he tried that in Washington, with the education bill and Ted Kennedy and asking for advise from Dem's on Social Security. It comes down to what SabanFan said.....neither party wants either to get credit for fixing anything. There was no way on GGE the Dem's would let Bush have a future legacy of "fixing Social Security." He should get credit for being the first president who actually tried to do something about that mess. And whether you agree or not, the only way to fix that IMO is to privatize the whole thing. The government can not successfully manage and support a comprehensive retirement plan anymore than they can manage and support a National Healthcare system, a Medicare system, a drug benefit plan, NASA, welfare, education, etc, etc. All gigantic failures. Everything they do except national defense ought to be shutdown for good or either privatized. The states ought to control all of the rest.
