Sport Bikes banner

21 - 40 of 58 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,690 Posts
jim schmidt said:
Democratic voters simply don't go for that selfish crap. People who do vote Republican. Both legislative agendas represent their employers, although Repubs also seem to have a fair number of middle class dumbasses who believe the selfish party is acutally representing them. I believe it is this segment, the Gullible Vote, that tips the balance.
Crap, I must be a middle class dumbass who thinks the selfish party is actually representing me. Thanks for the clarification. WHEHW.. glad thats clear. :fiddy
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
timd99 said:
Crap, I must be a middle class dumbass who thinks the selfish party is actually representing me. Thanks for the clarification. WHEHW.. glad thats clear. :fiddy
Pretty much. :rolleyes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
jim schmidt said:
Compare legislative historys. You'll find that there are significant differences in the kinds of legislation they propose which casts a different light than you've described.

Can you list 3 examples from each party?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Here are a few that come to mind:
Democrats:
The Social Security System
The 1964 Civil Rights Act
Americans with Disabilities Act
Family & Medical Leave Act

Republicans:
Tax Cuts for the Wealthy
Malpractice "Reform"
Record "Earmarking"
Rollbacks in regulation of pollutants
See no evil on Global Warming
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
jim schmidt said:
Republicans:
Tax Cuts for the Wealthy
Malpractice "Reform"
Record "Earmarking"
Rollbacks in regulation of pollutants
See no evil on Global Warming
Falling $25 million short of promised funding for the No Child Left Behind initiative, and opposing safeguards for protecting public school budgets.

This can't be blamed on Republicans as much as it can on the Bush administration(s). But then again I'm too young to remember prior to Bush Sr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
bumblebee said:
Can you list 3 examples from each party?

My mistake...could you provide specific legislation?

Generalities suck...I mean, the same Party you claim brought us the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I claim brought us the Viet Nam "Conflict" and the riots at the convention in Chicago in 1968...So, like statistics, generalities can be used to mislead...
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
bumblebee said:
My mistake...could you provide specific legislation?
I can provide numbers for one of his points.

Tax cuts for the wealthy:
http://www.ctj.org/html/gwb0602.htm

By 2010, when (and if) the Bush tax reductions are fully in place, an astonishing 52 percent of the total tax cuts will go to the richest one percent—whose average 2010 income will be $1.5 million. Their tax-cut windfall in that year alone will average $85,000 each. Put another way, of the estimated $234 billion in tax cuts scheduled for the year 2010, $121 billion will go just 1.4 million taxpayers.
I'm in the process of looking for the specific legislation regarding some of these cuts, but I'm currently at work, so my efforts come in bursts of 5-10 minutes at a time. More to follow.
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
jim schmidt said:
The Democrat stuff is specific legislation. The Republican stuff is many pieces of legislation.
And before we go any furthur, I'd like to remind everybody that getting a hummer from an intern does not constitute legislation.

Thank you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
jim schmidt said:
The Democrat stuff is specific legislation. The Republican stuff is many pieces of legislation.

The issue was not whether either has done bad stuff, both have. It was who they legislate on behalf of.
So you are telling me that the Democratic Party, the party you claim are the party of the "poor working people" and Civil rights, who entered and escalated the fighting in Southeast Asia were working for the poor, southern blacks who died at a disproportionate rate than even the poor southern whites?

Are you telling me that the Democratic party wasn't passing out lucrative no bid defense contracts to companies like Graumann, lockheed and General Dynamics, all of which were headquartered in Texas at the time??

I believe you're using a mighty wide brush to paint with...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,622 Posts
bumblebee said:
So you are telling me that the Democratic Party, the party you claim are the party of the "poor working people" and Civil rights, who entered and escalated the fighting in Southeast Asia were working for the poor, southern blacks who died at a disproportionate rate than even the poor southern whites?

Are you telling me that the Democratic party wasn't passing out lucrative no bid defense contracts to companies like Graumann, lockheed and General Dynamics, all of which were headquartered in Texas at the time??

I believe you're using a mighty wide brush to paint with...
And now, the Republicans started a war in a country that wasn't in conflict. The "party of inclusion" now passes out no bid contracts, with direct relationships to the VP of the US AND at the expense of poor soldiers from less than stellar socioeconomic backgrounds.

Just because one group of assholes does it, doesn't make it ok for another group of assholes to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
Fargin_Bastige said:
And now, the Republicans started a war in a country that wasn't in conflict. The "party of inclusion" now passes out no bid contracts, with direct relationships to the VP of the US AND at the expense of poor soldiers from less than stellar socioeconomic backgrounds.

Just because one group of assholes does it, doesn't make it ok for another group of assholes to do it.

My point exactly!! Which is why I challenged the statement jim schmidt made here as incorrect and too vague...looking back over the legislative histories of both parties show a different pattern then what jim schmidt suggests


jim schmidt said:
Compare legislative historys. You'll find that there are significant differences in the kinds of legislation they propose which casts a different light than you've described.
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
bumblebee said:
My point exactly!! Which is why I challenged the statement jim schmidt made here as incorrect and too vague...looking back over the legislative histories of both parties show a different pattern then what jim schmidt suggests
Both sides are guilty of being bastards. I just figured you needed proof, or at least numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,622 Posts
bumblebee said:
My point exactly!! Which is why I challenged the statement jim schmidt made here as incorrect and too vague...looking back over the legislative histories of both parties show a different pattern then what jim schmidt suggests
Over recent history, which party has been known to be more friendly to social programs and worker's benefits?

All parties go through philosophical shifts.

For instance, this Republican group is PRO big government and PRO wasteful spending. Two things that the Republicans claim they are NOT for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
Fargin_Bastige said:
Over recent history, which party has been known to be more friendly to social programs and worker's benefits?

All parties go through philosophical shifts.

For instance, this Republican group is PRO big government and PRO wasteful spending. Two things that the Republicans claim they are NOT for.

Again...What do you consider to be recent history?? I have a car and clothes at home that are older than 75% of the people on this board.

Jim schmidt's comment did not say recent history...it said legislative history...I am trying to take jim schmidt at his posts. If he meant legislative history since 1988, he should have posted that...
 
21 - 40 of 58 Posts
Top