Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 07-17-2011, 02:35 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRB View Post
No actually not. I've been a registered voting republican since 1973. I vote republican, democrat, and independent near whenever I want or can. However, I hate with a passion all politicians weather I vote for them or not.

Just because I vote for the guy or gal and they end up getting elected doesn't mean that I like them.

Really, when it all comes out in the wash, near all policitians are scum of the earth, especially incumbents and career politicians.
If you hate the people you vote to represent you, you've disenfranchised yourself. Or you're a masochist.
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2011, 07:04 AM  
Senior Member

TN
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 118 | Kudos: +26
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
drop the bush "blank check" provision in medicare

raise taxes on the rich to clinton levels (which is historically still very very low)

quit being world police and drop our military spending down to only TWICE what the next biggest spending of any country

BAM!, deficit problem solved.

Yes...the Republicans have evidently made up their minds that the Bush tax cuts which were scheduled to expire in 2011 will never expire and consequently the gap between those who barely get by and the wealthy will continue to widen.

Corporations in this country used to share profits with their employees, the government and their shareholders. Now it appears that they believe they owe nothing to anyone or any entity except the CEO and shareholders.

I believe one of the biggest fallacies other than that is the fact that those who declare wars and military intervention do not have to worry about their own having to take part in it. Make a new law that each able bodied American must serve three years between the ages of 18-23 and see how often youngsters find themselves fighting some stupid intervention in a desert 10,000 miles away.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2011, 10:15 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorph View Post
Yes...the Republicans have evidently made up their minds that the Bush tax cuts which were scheduled to expire in 2011 will never expire and consequently the gap between those who barely get by and the wealthy will continue to widen.

Corporations in this country used to share profits with their employees, the government and their shareholders. Now it appears that they believe they owe nothing to anyone or any entity except the CEO and shareholders.

I believe one of the biggest fallacies other than that is the fact that those who declare wars and military intervention do not have to worry about their own having to take part in it. Make a new law that each able bodied American must serve three years between the ages of 18-23 and see how often youngsters find themselves fighting some stupid intervention in a desert 10,000 miles away.
I'm mixed on compulsory civil or military service, especially between the ages of 18 and 23. On the one hand, I don't think that basic military training is undesirable. On the other hand, hiring and paying that many troops would be a huge expenditure, and I think ultimately, it would be detrimental to military readiness. But I do think that some sort of compulsory service TRAINING is a good idea. 6 weeks of basic military, first responder, disaster recovery, police auxiliary, or other service-oriented training would be a good thing, IMO.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2011, 12:11 PM  
Senior Member

TN
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 118 | Kudos: +26
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
I'm mixed on compulsory civil or military service, especially between the ages of 18 and 23. On the one hand, I don't think that basic military training is undesirable. On the other hand, hiring and paying that many troops would be a huge expenditure, and I think ultimately, it would be detrimental to military readiness. But I do think that some sort of compulsory service TRAINING is a good idea. 6 weeks of basic military, first responder, disaster recovery, police auxiliary, or other service-oriented training would be a good thing, IMO.
Of course you're right. With troops stationed all over the world, even in Japan and Europe we would not have a use for that many. I guess I simply resent the Washington politicians declaring military intervention and worrying about which Ivy League school their kids will attend while what used to be the middle class have to worry about theirs seeing combat.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.