Occupy !

[craigiri]

You're right. 21% of American Jews

You're a funny guy!

Yes 21% of American Jews, a tiny minority which would reflect a complete landslide in any election anywhere, are probably tied in with more militant zionism and want the unlimited military welfare that the "small government" types want to provide to Israel.
You seem to lack the capability to explain the votes of the other 79%, but we can leave it at that.

Oh, BTW, there are extreme right wing jews (mostly orthodox) here and in Israel. Some of them believe all Christians are on the earth simply as slaves to serve us. I suspect these folks didn't vote for Obama.

Anyway, you made your point. Reason and logic are not your strong suits when you grasp onto 21% as "proof" of the right wing tendencies of jews. I hope you learned something - make sure you quote that figure on the next forum when you rant about the anti-semitic left.

 

[Fred Sherman]

"Reason and logic are not your strong suits..."

I would disagree. You seem to want to reflect this back on me. You're the one that made the bigoted religious references and continue to make them about anyone who disagrees with you.

"...probably tied in with more militant zionism..."

I haven't offered any explanation, because I don't feel the need to; it was never the point. The point was, remains and was reinforced by even your latest post that while you cry racism and homophobia, you engage in your own very open bigotry, showing the hypocrisy of your viewpoint.

Just to restate your previous characterizations, anyone voting against Obama is either a racist, homophobe, a rapture fearing zealot or a militant zionist.

Wow, and you think I have a problem with reason and logic.

 

[craigiri]

Fred, I was responding to:
"I think you'll find that any anti-semitism comes from the left, not the conservatives that make up the Tea Party. If anything, one of their biggest complaints is the way this administration has abandoned Israel"

Notice your words "any" and "comes from the left".
I don't expect to change your mind on these matters, but if you delve into the history of everything from the John Birch Society (still a sponsor of Cpac) to the Texas oil money men (still financing the rabid right) and MANY MANY MANY other right wing groups, you will find that hatred of Jews (and also catholics, blacks, etc.) is tops on their agendas. Always. Speak to a "real" Texan even today and the slurs will pour forth one after another.

McCarthyism, a product of the right, is still alive and with us today.

In any case, let's move on. Occupy has some real issues that the right should get behind - namely making this a country for people as opposed to wealthy banksters and multi-national corporations. If it wasn't for the TP hating that black dude in the WH, they would probably agree with much of the Occupy creed.

I will 100% agree that the Tea Party had more billions in financing and more PR from offices full of monied Republican Operatives - so it comes through much more carefully and scripted. However, pull back the curtain just a bit and you see an alignment of ALL those groups I mentioned and more. If you are, in your heart, a true tea partier you would be anti-corporate, as the original Tea Parties were protesting against exactly that - control by the East India Tea Corporation (a multi-national corporation).

 

[Digital Doctor]

Not saying you (or anyone) has to like or support Obama as President. But, I do not get this comment.

The HealthCare bill is weak. That is why I said it was a failure. The main failure is that it does nothing to meaningfully address rising costs and the long term affordability.

ObamaCare

I really don't like that term. It was invented by the Republicans and has major biases attached to it. Like the term "Entitlements".

ObamaCare is still law and has time yet to be fully implemented. So, I don't see how that counts as a fail. Under Obama, we withdrew from Iraq, killed Osama Bin Laden, killed Khadafi, have taken out numerous other terrorists. We are making progress in drawing down in Afghanistan. The economy, while certainly not good, is in better shape than when he got into office.

Not everyone will agree that he has done a great job. But, I don't think its accurate to say he has done "nothing" either. Another point, I have heard several times, most recently from the RNC chairman, that he is doing too many appearances and he is the "Campaigner-in-chief." This seems to be the exact opposite criticism of the one you seem to level. Though, if you mean he should more to publicize his victories, I agree. The Democrat party has an awful habit of not marketing the good things they do.

Either way, I don't think the Republican nominee (whoever that may be) has a chance. It may not be a blowout, but there are many potential chinks in the armor (Mitt- taxes, history at Bain Capital, some people's discomfort with Mormon religion, alienation of Latino voters. Newt- style issues, like huge line of credit at Tiffany's, weird doings with some of his non-profits, infidelity issues which will turn off some voters, lack of discipline within campaign, and a penchant for going off the rails). I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

Actually I feel a lopsided Democratic win is likely.
The Republicans are not the party of the 99%.
The mood of America is not to support the 1%.

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/occupy.21157/page-5#post-272518

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/occupy.21157/page-12#post-284173

 

[craigiri]

The mood of America is not to support the 1%.

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/occupy.21157/page-5#post-272518

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/occupy.21157/page-12#post-284173

I think that is a good overall view. Being a bit more blunt, the tea party shot their load a bit early and has absolutely no traction. When it warms up this spring, the occupy thingy is gonna sprout. Although most of us cannot ID with the protestors fully, we do see the inequality and unfairness they are speaking of.

The State of the Union next week will be Obamas opening act. It will be For The People. He's sitting back and playing the Adult in the Room and letting all the little kids fight. I think enough independents will see that and install him back into office. I'll have a chuckle at the expense of all my friends who "just knew" that "no american" could possibly vote for him again. Hah.

 

[Digital Doctor]

If the Democrats can't use the 99% vs 1% debate to their advantage then maybe they don't deserve to win.
FWIW, I think they will.

I think enough independents will see that and install him back into office. I'll have a chuckle at the expense of all my friends who "just knew" that "no american" could possibly vote for him again. Hah.

They'll all vote for Obama, but be pissed off they have to !!!
The Independents who voted for the Democrats in 2008 have zero reasons to vote Republican.
America wants change. It would have to be one helluva campaign to make the Republicans look like The Party of Change. I don't think even the Republicans have enough money to pull that off. Hah.

 

[D.O.A.]

Occupy !

*looks at watch*

I think it's over bro, apple stores are full of customers again

*ducks chair*

 

[Fred Sherman]

Obama is going to do everything he can to expand welfare and unemployment benefits because come 2013, he'll need them.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Obama is going to do everything he can to expand welfare and unemployment benefits because come 2013, he'll need them.

LOL.

 

[Digital Doctor]

The Party of the 99% vs. The Party of Gridlock, so says America.

America blames the GOP for Gridlock.

 

[jadmperry]

It's a shame, too, for the Republicans (as a tactical matter). Though I disagree with the concessions made, during the original debt ceiling/appropriations for spending fight, the Republicans missed an opportunity to declare victory on what was proposed. President Obama basically met their original demands on many points. Instead of accepting this and taking a "win," I think the GOP was more concerned with denying anything that was proposed and took the risk of looking like spoilers. That is pretty much what came to pass- instead of looking like they forced the Democrats to meet their demands, they chose to press further and ended up looking like all they care about is blocking legislation that, by the way, contained most of what they wanted originally.

Like I said, I don't agree with the GOP position; just politically, they look like the "Party of 'No'." (I think this came about, in part, out of partisan politics, but also out of a desire for individuals to try to "out-conservative" their political opponents. This was also a consequence of the Tea Party movement; pandering to that interest really was a poor choice in terms of a general election strategy (be it a Congressional race, or the Presidential race)).

 

[craigiri]

It's a shame, too, for the Republicans (as a tactical matter). Though I disagree with the concessions made, during the original debt ceiling/appropriations for spending fight, the Republicans missed an opportunity to declare victory on what was proposed.

This would have allowed them to declare the "victory" of having spent money and then not be responsible enough to pay it. Of course, that is against the US Constitution, common sense and basic responsibility....still, if we all could run up debts and bills and not pay them - and hold our creditors hostage - what a wonderful world it would be!

 

[jadmperry]

This would have allowed them to declare the "victory" of having spent money and then not be responsible enough to pay it. Of course, that is against the US Constitution, common sense and basic responsibility....still, if we all could run up debts and bills and not pay them - and hold our creditors hostage - what a wonderful world it would be!

That may be, but how can you ask for something (even if it is not a perfect solution in your mind), get the concession you asked for, and then reject it as not enough? Especially knowing you are not going to be able to get more? That is both bad politics and irresponsible. That's why majority of people blame GOP for gridlock.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Mitt and his ruthless capitalism are going to be a huge liability.

On Thursday — even as Mr. Romney started broadcasting a television commercial accusing the president of approving dishonest attacks — Mr. Obama’s campaign seized on a new report in The Boston Globe about Securities and Exchange Commission documents showing that Mr. Romney was listed as the chief executive, president and owner of Bain Capital during that period.​

The president’s team moved with a fury, holding a 45-minute conference call with reporters to denounce what they called Mr. Romney’s “Bain lie.” Stephanie Cutter, a deputy campaign manager for Mr. Obama, said it seemed possible that Mr. Romney had committed a felony.​

“Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the S.E.C., which is a felony,” Ms. Cutter said, “or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people.”​

​

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/u...os-over-a-romney-role-at-bain-after-1999.html​

 

[Jake Bunce]

I let the health care thread go for a long time because it was a policy discussion that is important to many Americans. This is an old thread about the Occupy movement, though the discussion seems to have strayed into election politics. Policy politics is one thing (e.g. health care), but election politics is something else entirely. I'm gonna lock this.