MAMEWorld Forums - Welcome to the War Room - No comments about the internet turn-over?

> It's several points/problems. We have a president that won't compromise, it's his
> way or no way.

This as opposed to the "compromise" that the republicans in the senate engaged in, which was to throw a conniption fit and essentially gut what was originally intended to be a robust, single-payer solution?

> He proved this point immediately after taking office by promising a
> full open debate over health care but yet the minute he took office it was all done
> behind closed doors and Since there was enough democrats to pass it no republicans
> were allowed and his office policy hasn't changed much since then.

Were you and I even living on the same planet at the time? Because I seem to recall the republicans were in control of the house at the time, and refused to pass the bill unless it was gutted of anything that would be potentially worthwhile and actually help people. Then to put the cherry on that cake of shit, a group of influential republican politicians ginned up the term "Obamacare" to convince all of the easily-led automatons that it was his fault rather than the childish antics of the political drones in the house and senate.

> We then have a large number on welfare who will vote to who ever promises the
> largest increases in benefits and more benefits. So that voting base is sewed up.

Oh please, why can't you at least have the logical consistency to say what you're really thinking, "Those blacks sure are using a lot of the white man's money"?

> Notice last year the state's that paid the largest welfare benefits had the largest
> number on the rolls. The state's that had the least benefits had the lowest number of
> people on welfare, not hard to figure out why.

Yes, because that's how math works? If in one state you have a thousand people that draw $1 in welfare, and in another state you have a hundred people that draw $1 in welfare, surprise surprise, the state with the most people on welfare will be paying out the largest amount of welfare. Shocking!

> That's like in certain cities where minimum wage was raised, some of those receiving
> welfare benefits wanted their hours cut back as not to raise their income so they
> wouldn't lose benefits.

That's weird, here in the real world employers started cutting workers' hours back themselves in order to keep everyone just below 40 hours, at which point employers would actually have to invest in their workers rather than treating them like cows happily being led into a slaughterhouse.

> Then we have lifers and dynasties (clinton is a perfect example of the latter) that
> are in office not to do good for the people as a whole but for power and money.
> Clinton vs. Sanders is a perfect example of behind the scenes corruption that happens
> daily. They have enough power and money to try to destroy anyone who stands against
> them. And get away with it. Then we have a media that protects them, (hillary had her
> private little dinner with all the main media personal at the beginning of her run).

What makes you think most people actually want to vote for Hillary? She's a garbage choice, and the fact that the DNC engaged in shady backroom dealings to pick her over Sanders ultimately boils down to the fact that democrats are just as corrupt as they accuse republicans of being. There are no winners here, and by buying hook, line and sinker into the jingoistic bullshit that the media says you must in order to be a "real patriotic American", you're further cementing your own demise. It's not like there's an effective third party either, Gary Johnson is an ignorant lunatic who only wishes he had half the charisma of Trump, but he can't even bring that to the table. The realistic two choices that the voters have are between an emasculating harpy and an unhinged lunatic chomping at the bit to push the Big Red Button(tm).

> Then you have people like Ted Turner who owns most media outlets and in bed with the
> Clintons so it takes a lot of smaller news outlets to break a story, push a story
> until the larger media outlets have to publish something so as not to look like their
> hiding anything. But the minute a "major" story comes out against their candidate
> they throw up a news story about it one day then the next day the news is some cat
> that fell into a drain. The news media is great at bait and switch to protect their
> candidate.

Haha, are you for real? Maybe you can answer this, why is it that hardcore adherents to any particular political party are so fond of making arguments against the "other" side that can just as easily be sent their way? You could replace "Clintons" with "republicans" and "Ted Turner" with "Rupert Murdoch" and what you said would be just as true. You don't even realize that the "us" that you're part of engages in exactly the same sort of dirty tactics and corruption as the "them" in your world. They're just two sides of the same, shitty coin, and the sooner you and the rest of America realize that, the sooner people can actually start taking their country back from the media conglomerates and corporations that quietly run the show while you happily blame one political party or the other. But is that ever going to happen? Nah, not as long as the liberals have MSNBC and the republicans have FOX.

> Then we have laws that do more to protect the divide of the nation then to bring it
> together, a Muslim can cover their face and walk into any bank but yet for me or
> anyone else it's illegal to walk into a bank wearing a hoodie. A Muslim child in
> school can pray to allah during the day and teachers have to permit it but yet a
> Christian can't pray over their food at lunch, even quietly.

Citation needed. Some particularly vocal Christians seem to have this really bizarre persecution complex where they think that giving people of other religions (or no religion) the same rights that they've enjoyed for centuries is somehow denying them of those rights. You said it yourself, that you "can't pray of your food at lunch, even quietly," which is such an unfathomably stupid and unverifiable statement that I feel stupider for even having read it.

It's also not illegal to walk into a bank wearing a hoodie. The bank owners can legally ask you to remove your hoodie just as much as they can ask a woman in a niqab to remove her headdress, because it's a private business that is not under any first amendment obligations.

It seems to me that it's people like you who do more to create a divide in this country, acting like people being treated equally is somehow a slight against Christianity. Your entire post reads like a white-knuckled "us versus them" manifesto that so perfectly highlights everything that's wrong with political discourse in this country. You act like everything wrong with the country is the fault of some nebulous "other" while absolving your political allies of any guilt for their just as equal culpability.

> And the list goes on, those in power press the divide to get the promise of their
> votes in return for more welfare, more benefits, more privileges, more special
> treatment.

See, you almost get it. It's not a republicans versus democrats thing. It's a people versus politicians and corporations thing. The sooner people realize that the better.

> I say fire them all and vote in the average American who knows what it's like living
> pay check to pay check, someone who has actually worked hard for living.
>
> But for that to happen, we'll it's an impossibility because most on welfare ain't
> gonna give up one benefit, the special interest groups ain't gonna give up 1 law that
> gives them the advantage and those seeking special treatment ain't giving nothing up
> either.
>
> I just wish one law covered everyone the same, that politicians actually cared about
> the people and not their position and that people had the pride, character to work
> for what they have not what they can get for free.

You hit the nail on the head, man. Everyone's too concerned with "fuck you, got mine" to actually do anything to benefit society. But the problem is that when you try to point out that the true root of most of the evil in American society is the corporations that line politicians' pockets, and the politicians that accept the status quo, everyone wants to brand you as a "communist" or a "socialist", as if there's something inherently wrong with that.

Because you can look for yourself at what rampant, unchecked capitalism gets you: It gets you the situation you're in right now, where everyone is only out for him or herself, and the crab bucket mentality prevails. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, the USA isn't actually doing everything right, and that maybe, just maybe, other countries in the world aren't actually doing everything wrong.

So, yeah. The USA has freedom of speech, and that's a good thing. But it also doesn't put food on the table, pay the bills, or seem to stop corrupt politicians.

As for the original point, being proud to be an American, that strikes me as about as weird as being proud to be black, proud to be white, proud to be gay, proud to be a man, proud to be a woman, or proud to be born disabled. It's just plain weird to be proud of something that you yourself had no control over and no choice in the matter.

>> Were you and I even living on the same planet at the time? Because I seem to recall
> the republicans were in control of the house at the time, and refused to pass the
> bill unless it was gutted of anything that would be potentially worthwhile and
> actually help people. Then to put the cherry on that cake of shit, a group of
> influential republican politicians ginned up the term "Obamacare" to convince all of
> the easily-led automatons that it was his fault rather than the childish antics of
> the political drones in the house and senate.
>

You need to go back to your history books and quite believing the media lies, from 2009_2011 house: democrats 257, republicans 178; congress democrats 57 +2 independents that voted on party lines pretty much with the democrats, republicans 41
History lesson over

>
> > Oh please, why can't you at least have the logical consistency to say what you're
> really thinking, "Those blacks sure are using a lot of the white man's money"?
>

I don't give a damn what skin color they are, black,white,pink,purple, who gives a damn, point is many have made it a career choice, it's become generational with some, that's wrong and needs to be stopped.

>
> Yes, because that's how math works? If in one state you have a thousand people that
> draw $1 in welfare, and in another state you have a hundred people that draw $1 in
> welfare, surprise surprise, the state with the most people on welfare will be paying
> out the largest amount of welfare. Shocking!
>

Re read my statement, didn't say amount of cost I said benefits as in the amount and cost of benefits to each person. One state pays each one a dollar this state has the lowest number drawing that dollar, a state that pays each person 10 dollars has the highest number on welfare. Got it? Why? Why get a job when with benefits welfare pays more?

>
> That's weird, here in the real world employers started cutting workers' hours back
> themselves in order to keep everyone just below 40 hours, at which point employers
> would actually have to invest in their workers rather than treating them like cows
> happily being led into a slaughterhouse.
>

Most on welfare aren't working anywhere near 40 hrs a week anyway, if they were most wouldn't need welfare. So your statement is a mute point

>
> > What makes you think most people actually want to vote for Hillary? She's a garbage
> choice, and the fact that the DNC engaged in shady backroom dealings to pick her over
> Sanders ultimately boils down to the fact that democrats are just as corrupt as they
> accuse republicans of being. There are no winners here, and by buying hook, line and
> sinker into the jingoistic bullshit that the media says you must in order to be a
> "real patriotic American", you're further cementing your own demise. It's not like
> there's an effective third party either, Gary Johnson is an ignorant lunatic who only
> wishes he had half the charisma of Trump, but he can't even bring that to the table.
> The realistic two choices that the voters have are between an emasculating harpy and
> an unhinged lunatic chomping at the bit to push the Big Red Button(tm).
>

But yet hillary is the one being pushed by the media, talk shows etc, these are the same outlets that was pushing her during her and Sanders...

>
> Haha, are you for real? Maybe you can answer this, why is it that hardcore adherents
> to any particular political party are so fond of making arguments against the "other"
> side that can just as easily be sent their way? You could replace "Clintons" with
> "republicans" and "Ted Turner" with "Rupert Murdoch" and what you said would be just
> as true. You don't even realize that the "us" that you're part of engages in exactly
> the same sort of dirty tactics and corruption as the "them" in your world. They're
> just two sides of the same, shitty coin, and the sooner you and the rest of America
> realize that, the sooner people can actually start taking their country back from the
> media conglomerates and corporations that quietly run the show while you happily
> blame one political party or the other. But is that ever going to happen? Nah, not as
> long as the liberals have MSNBC and the republicans have FOX.
>

Again name one republican, one independent, that has been thru as many scandals as the Clintons?
Hillary and her deleting emails is nothing new, she did the exact same thing during the white water scandal, she was one of the first to stand up loud and vocal against clearance Thomas and Anita when he was accused of rape but yet after all the numerous women that have come out against Bill, well that's always a republican smear campaign that doesn't warrant and investigation.
Again I don't care which side the aisle they're from the Clintons hold the record for deceit and dishonesty.
I'm actually independent and have voted across all party lines

> > Then we have laws that do more to protect the divide of the nation then to bring it
> > together, a Muslim can cover their face and walk into any bank but yet for me or
> > anyone else it's illegal to walk into a bank wearing a hoodie. A Muslim child in
> > school can pray to allah during the day and teachers have to permit it but yet a
> > Christian can't pray over their food at lunch, even quietly.
>
> Citation needed. Some particularly vocal Christians seem to have this really bizarre
> persecution complex where they think that giving people of other religions (or no
> religion) the same rights that they've enjoyed for centuries is somehow denying them
> of those rights. You said it yourself, that you "can't pray of your food at lunch,
> even quietly," which is such an unfathomably stupid and unverifiable statement that I
> feel stupider for even having read it.>

> It's also not illegal to walk into a bank wearing a hoodie. The bank owners can
> legally ask you to remove your hoodie just as much as they can ask a woman in a niqab
> to remove her headdress, because it's a private business that is not under any first
> amendment obligations.
>
> It seems to me that it's people like you who do more to create a divide in this
> country, acting like people being treated equally is somehow a slight against
> Christianity. Your entire post reads like a white-knuckled "us versus them" manifesto
> that so perfectly highlights everything that's wrong with political discourse in this
> country. You act like everything wrong with the country is the fault of some nebulous
> "other" while absolving your political allies of any guilt for their just as equal
> culpability.
>
> > And the list goes on, those in power press the divide to get the promise of their
> > votes in return for more welfare, more benefits, more privileges, more special
> > treatment.
>
> See, you almost get it. It's not a republicans versus democrats thing. It's a people
> versus politicians and corporations thing. The sooner people realize that the better.
>
> > I say fire them all and vote in the average American who knows what it's like
> living
> > pay check to pay check, someone who has actually worked hard for living.
> >
> > But for that to happen, we'll it's an impossibility because most on welfare ain't
> > gonna give up one benefit, the special interest groups ain't gonna give up 1 law
> that
> > gives them the advantage and those seeking special treatment ain't giving nothing
> up
> > either.
> >
> > I just wish one law covered everyone the same, that politicians actually cared
> about
> > the people and not their position and that people had the pride, character to work
> > for what they have not what they can get for free.
>
> You hit the nail on the head, man. Everyone's too concerned with "fuck you, got mine"
> to actually do anything to benefit society. But the problem is that when you try to
> point out that the true root of most of the evil in American society is the
> corporations that line politicians' pockets, and the politicians that accept the
> status quo, everyone wants to brand you as a "communist" or a "socialist", as if
> there's something inherently wrong with that.
>
> Because you can look for yourself at what rampant, unchecked capitalism gets you: It
> gets you the situation you're in right now, where everyone is only out for him or
> herself, and the crab bucket mentality prevails. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that
> maybe, just maybe, the USA isn't actually doing everything right, and that maybe,
> just maybe, other countries in the world aren't actually doing everything wrong.
>
> So, yeah. The USA has freedom of speech, and that's a good thing. But it also doesn't
> put food on the table, pay the bills, or seem to stop corrupt politicians.
>
> As for the original point, being proud to be an American, that strikes me as about as
> weird as being proud to be black, proud to be white, proud to be gay, proud to be a
> man, proud to be a woman, or proud to be born disabled. It's just plain weird to be
> proud of something that you yourself had no control over and no choice in the matter.

I will answer the rest later tonight, gotta go pick up my son...