Philzone.org - Philzone Phansite Community Discussion Board: Politics: Politics - Archive 2012: "We're dumb, but we're not stupid"

"We're dumb, but we're not stupid" -Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz

(He said that today referring to republicans in congress.)

Basically sums up the entire republican party in one sentence.

In the 2010 Midterm Elections, the Republican Party gained 63 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and six seats in the U.S. Senate from the Democratic Party. Republicans also gained six governorships, including Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. Republicans gained 680 seats in state legislatures, the most in the modern era.

Now let's list all the good things they've done since then.

In my state they've gotten rid of thousands of state employees, passed a ban on gay marriage (we already had one), redistricted the state in such a way that half the voters don't know where to go on Election Day or who they'll be voting for, driven the state deeper in debt, tried to do away with the Racial Justice Act and gutted public education. All that in one year. Not to mention the half dozen or so "Special sessions" they've called, each one of which costs taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars.

^ would it be best; if the R's just sit this election out ?

The GOP has to pick up just four Senate seats to gain control of the upper chamber 2012. The great equalizer.

in massachusetts they only grow the state employee rolls, the turnpike authority is a joke, sometimes cutting is good. sounds like a lot of what happens in most states, all depends on which side you prefer.

walker is being recalled in wisconsin for his lunacy....walker lost another court battle today in which he tried to delay his recall...

kasich is the most hated man in ohio now.


obama is gonna crush whatever nut the redumblicans run...and down ticket, through the states, the dems are gonna have a MASSIVE sweep.

This is not your parents Republican party. They have moved so far right we are in uncharted territory. The Democrats have also moved about the same distance to the right that they now occupy the political space the Republicans occupied a mere generation ago. An example of this would be the fact that the recent Healthcare legislation passed by the Democrats when they had control of the House, Senate, and Presidency is basically what the Republican Party was proposing a decade or so ago.

The Right Wing mantra of 'Big Business Good, Government Regulation Bad' has been the road Washington has followed since Ronald Reagan. It led to an unregulated and out of control Wall Street chasing HUGE short term profits, while willing putting the world economy at the edge of a cliff. Same thing happened in 1929; persons obsessed with short term greed willingly placing the whole economic system at risk.

The only difference between 1929 and 2008 was that once FDR got in office he pushed to get regulatory legislation passed that had REAL teeth in monitoring Wall Street and the financial sector. This time around President Obama pushed to get financial regulatory legislation passed that basically had NO teeth and allowed Wall Street to just continue on its merry way (After the tax payers bailed them out).

This goes back to my point that the Democratic party is basically your fathers Republican party, so of course they didn't pass tough Wall Street regulation, even though Wall Street nearly collapsed the world economy. No Political entity has moved onto the scene to occupy the space once held by the Democratic party.

My question is how has this country been doing now that both Parties have moved an equal distance to the right? Where are all the jobs that the Republicans promised if only we let the rich have more tax breaks so that they could create more jobs? In 1960 the top 1% economically controlled about 7% of the wealth in the United States. Today that top 1% controls roughly 22% of the Nations wealth. This is thanks to Congress continually passing HUGE tax breaks for the wealthy ever since Reagan. Have they created more jobs? NO! What they did with all their new wealth was fuel a speculative bubble on Wall Street gladly enabled by persons on Wall Street who placed short term profits over the financial stability of the USA and the World.

Nothing has really changed in Washington or Wall Street, so my bet is that the roughly 50-60 years of financial stability FDR created by passing REAL financial regulatory legislation won't be repeated this time.

>>have a MASSIVE sweep.

^This will help the D's lock up the 2012 November elections. Nothing like high price of gas to get americans excited. I'm exstatic that the prices of shipping goods are on the rise ?

^Despite record gas prices Democrats killed another Arctic drilling project last week. This comes after Obama rejected the Keystone pipeline project. US gas prices at the pump have doubled since the Obama took office.

“This definitely sets the stage, potentially, for much higher prices later this year,” said Brian L. Milne, refined fuels editor for Telvent DTN, a commodity information services firm. “There’s a chance that the U.S. average tops $4 a gallon by June, with some parts of the country approaching $5 a gallon.”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/thanks-to- democrats-gas-prices-could-top-5-a-gallon-this-yea r/

If the oil companies get their pipeline and arctic drilling how much will they lower the price of gas? What will the savings be for the people of the United States?

^^Right, good point.. The American people will back this approach. It will be good for the D's on the fence. It will make administration popular with moderate D's

My guess is that there will be no savings. Just more profits for the oil companies. Of course their supporters in congress will be rewarded!

>>My guess is that there will be no savings
^...really ?

>>If the oil companies get their pipeline and arctic drilling how much will they lower the price of gas?

If the US Refineriers have to close. How much can the american people expect the Gas prices to rise?

^Same kind of reasoning.

Why would they have to close?

Fire at one...Closure at another. ...Say were running on 50% capacity for the next 10 years. Will that decrease the price of gas ?

>>arctic drilling how much will they lower the

^It depends on how much is discovered..

Why would they lower the price instead of increasing profits?

They are running the refineries below capacity to create a false scarcity of gasoline.

There is no shortage of crude oil.

That's how they get away with charging $4 a gallon.

^Supply and Demand

Revenue surged 74% to a record $46.3 billion and profit more than doubled to $13.1 billion, blowing away Wall Street's expectations as Apple sold more iPhones, iPads and Mac computers than in any quarter in its history.

"They just demolished it," said analyst Peter Misek of Jefferies & Co. "Everyone thought they were too big and … that they couldn't pull off a surprise like this, but boy did they ever."

>>Why would they lower the price instead of increasing profits?>>

^are you reffering to Apple ? ..Using your reasoning. If we put more regulations and made it difficult for Apple. There prices will come down? That is a tough sell. Good luck with that.

>>There is no shortage of crude oil.

^so double short the oil companies.

US oil production is at an 8 year high.

US oil importation is at a 16 year low.

^Rising Gas Prices And The 2012 Elections

U.S. inventories have been rising. Demand has fallen as U.S. consumers have adjusted to driving less. The reason prices aren’t falling comes down to increased uncertainty.

Prices, he says, are being buoyed by home-grown uncertainties as well. The market is waiting to see if Sunoco will shut down its Philadelphia refinery, which, if it happens, would be the third refinery closure in Pennsylvania in the last six months. “If you’re in the northeast,” he says, “You need to be concerned, especially if you’re in the Philadelphia region.”(Jerry)

What would lower U.S. gas prices, he says, is the ability to pipe crude from newly discovered fields in North Dakota to refineries on the Gulf of Mexico, home to 40 percent of U.S. refining capacity. That increase in domestic gasoline production would lessen U.S. dependency on more expensive imported fuel. By the end of this year, North Dakota will be producing more oil than Alaska. But the pipeline(keystone xl), for now, remains, he says, “a political football.”

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rising-gas-prices -and-the-2012-elections/

The oil companies needed to raise the price of gasoline because we have had a mild winter and they haven't sold as much home heating oil as they expected.

The oil companies will set new records for profits again this year.

prices are rising b/c idiots are threatening war with iran--its speculators-mainly with gop ties-doing this to try and subvert obama b/c obama is shifting america toward cleaner and greener fuels and fuel use...

prices are rising b/c idiots are threatening war with iran >>




who are the idiots ?

be specific

>>The oil companies
^you'll still be paying at the pump.

Americans' pain at the gas pump could mean pain on election night for President Obama come November.

The national average for regular unleaded gasoline is now $3.52 a gallon, according to the Energy Department. That's up more than 4 cents a gallon from a week ago, and experts are predicting that this summer, gas prices could go higher. Much higher. Think record highs.

Gasoline could top $4 a gallon by June, and in some places it could be near $5. Big cities like Chicago and San Francisco could be especially hard hit.


http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/14/if-ga soline-hits-record-prices-this-summer-how-much-wil l-it-hurt-president-obamas-re-election-chances%E2% 80%AC-%E2%80%AA-%E2%80%AC/

>> threatening war with iran >>

^that is also contributing factor for sure.

>>be specific
The Pentagon calls for 'urgent' upgrade of massive bunker-busting bombs, as Iranian threat looms

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/10/pentago n-calls-for-urgent-upgrade-bunker-busting-bombs-as -iranian-threat-looms/#ixzz1msBefuQo

anyone threatening to go to war with iran is an idiot.

^I thought Saundi Arabia was smarter. But if you say so.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/2 012116154947655566.html

anyone threatening to go to war with iran is an idiot.>>

you don't want to be specific?


anyone is not specific.

anyone = Israel and the US

he didn't want to say it.



another question..

is anyone who threatens Isreal with war ..are they also idiots?

>is anyone who threatens Isreal with war ..are they also idiots?<

yes. stupid question...

the u.s. isnt threatening a war with iran..certain people and interests in the US are..such as rick sanitarium, mitt romney, newt gingrich, john mccain.

obama, so far, is threatening more sanctions.

Israel would be dumb to strike iran, and iran would be equally stupid to strike israel...and they both know it.

this is a whole lot of media hype and distractive nonsense. it (war) will not happen in any major way from either side. its just chicken little nonsense.

UK warns Iran: Close Hormuz at your own peril

By BLOOMBERG01/05/2012

British defense secretary says Royal Navy will join any action to keep open Strait of Hormuz which Iran has threatened to block.

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id =252346&R=R4


US threatens war in the Persian Gulf


France threatens military action against Iran

http://rt.com/news/military-strike-iran-france-567 /

Iran threatens to hit Turkey if US or Israel attack

http://flipthepyramid.com/index.php/entry/iran-thr eatens-to-hit-turkey-if-us-or-israel-attack

false bravado. threats are b.s. on all sides...

threats are b.s. on all sides...>>


you better get hold of these guys ASAP..

they are taking the threat very seriously..and are predicting a strike by Israel on Iran in just a few short months..

I think all parties will be very relieved when you inform them its all BS.


remember when Israel took out the nukes in Iraq?

they don't want any of the madmen in the area with nukes..and neither does the sane Arab States.


3 to 4 months

obama will have us at war with iran somewhere around the end of sept first of oct

axelrod and obama are already hinting of it when they speak

watch

Discussions are already past and a plan is in the works for an Israeli strike w/ the U.S. entering the war with troops, air support, intel and weapons when assistance is requested. President Obama is a war President.


peace

obama will have us at war with iran somewhere around the end of sept first of oct

axelrod and obama are already hinting of it when they speak

watch

maybe so or maybe not but we all know that the GOP will have us at war with Iran if they win the election. Santorum has stated as much.

Could Saudi Arabia and Iran Soon Engage in a Nuclear Cold War?

For the wider region, a nuclear Iran and Saudi Arabia will certainly make Iraq, Syria, or Turkey think really hard about their relative positions.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/4181/could-saudi -arabia-and-iran-soon-engage-in-a-nuclear-cold-war

^^This is the senerio I see unfolding.

santorum is crazier than Ahmadinejad

iran poses no substantial threat to any state. End of story.

>threat > End of story.


^even Saudi Arabia ?

How many Iranians attacked us on 9-11? How many Saudis? Who's more dangerous?

iran poses no substantial threat to any state. >>


maybe not in your mind

in reality they are a major threat

and will be dealt with

and the threat will be eliminated for now

until regime change.

>>iran poses no substantial threat to any state. End of story.

Yeah, they just keep that heavily armed army, navy, airforce and theater missiles for the parades.

Who have they attacked? Their biggest threat is the fact that they nationalized their oil.

our tax dollars at work...

>>Who have they attacked?

Iraq. You forgot that already?

The Iran–Iraq War (also known as the First Persian Gulf War and by various other names) was an armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest conventional war of the 20th century.

I didn't say that Iran poses no threat. I said it doesn't pose a substantial threat, and by that i mean that Iran is really no more of a threat to global security than any other nuclear power. If Iran gets nukes, it will be as much of a threat as the US, Israel, India or any other nuclear state, but the threat doesn't go beyond that. Admittedly, it may lead to an arms race in the region, but this was already started when Israel was the first country in that region to get nukes.

Its pretty easy to dismiss the primary stated reason for why Iran is a threat, which is Ahmadinijhad's talk of annihilating Israel. But if this of concern, we should be far more concerned about Israel. They don't just talk about annihilating people and states, but they actually have been doing it since the beginning of their history. First, frequently driving out the Palestinians from what is now Israel, as many leading Israeli historians will tell you, and then destroying any hopes of a Palestinian state by continuing to expand the settlements in the West Bank.

Anyone with half a brain knows that the real reason that a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to Israel and it's allie, the United States, is cause it will end Israel's position as the only nuclear power in the region and as a result Israel, and therefore the US, will lose foreign policy leverage in an oil rich region....

>The Iran–Iraq War (also known as the First Persian Gulf War and by various other names) was an armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest conventional war of the 20th century.<

Fair enough, but what is it about the current geopolitical situation in the middle east leads you to believe that Iran unprovoked will initiate a conflict with any of it's neighbours?

Bigbub, Iraq attacked Iran.

>>Bigbub, Iraq attacked Iran.

Yup, they did. And they got their asses kicked out. Then, for 6 more years, Iran attacked Iraq, prolonging the war into the bloodiest and longest WWI trench type conflict the world had ever seen in the 20th century.

Your point?

My point is that you were incorrect. Iran defended itself. If defending themselves makes them a threat then you are correct.

>>My point is that you were incorrect. Iran defended itself.

OK, I'm wrong. The peace loving, dove raising and olive branch extending Iranian clergy were just defending themselves for 6 additional years. They never attacked Kuwaiti oil tankers in the Persian gulf. They never had to agree to a UN brokered cease fire, because after the invasion was repulsed they went cheerfully back to weaving rugs and harvesting pistachio nuts. Its a myth that an additional 1.5 million Iranians and Iraqis died during that time.

You forgot to mention that the US was arming both sides. It's funny that you blame Iran for defending themselves because they took six additional years. How long were we in Afganistan and Iraq?

>>>Iraq attacked Iran.

with our blessing, and our mustard gas.

we're awesome!!

Bigbub, you pulled a bert and ignored my question....

>>Bigbub, you pulled a bert and ignored my question....

I don't recall having a dialog with you. Is your name JerryC too?

>>Fair enough, but what is it about the current geopolitical situation in the middle east leads you to believe that Iran unprovoked will initiate a conflict with any of it's neighbours?

OK I see where you asked. My apologies, I was responding to JerryC's assertion that Iran's 6 year warlike initiatives were peaceful overtures.

But in answer to your question, I'd point out again that it was Iran that attacked Kuwait. From Britanica.com:

The Iran-Iraq War of 1980–88 represented a serious threat to Kuwait’s security. Kuwait, fearing Iranian hegemony in the region, saw no alternative than to ally with Iraq and to supply substantial financial support and serving as a vital conduit for military supplies. Iran attacked a Kuwaiti refinery complex in 1981, and carried out subsequent acts of sabotage in 1983 and 1986. In 1985 a member of the underground pro-Iranian radical group al-Dawah attempted to assassinate the Kuwaiti ruler, Sheikh Jabir al-Ahmad al-Sabah.

In September 1986 Iran began to concentrate its attacks on gulf shipping, largely on Kuwaiti tankers. This led Kuwait to invite both the Soviet Union (with which it had established diplomatic relations in 1963) and the United States to provide protection for its tankers in early 1987. The effect of the war was to promote closer relations with Kuwait’s conservative gulf Arab neighbours (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman), with whom Kuwait had formed the Gulf Cooperation Council in 1981 in order to develop closer cooperation on economic and security issues.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/325644/K uwait/93658/Iran-Iraq-War

history. First, frequently driving out the Palestinians from what is now Israel, as many leading Israeli historians will tell you, and then destroying any hopes of a Palestinian state by continuing to expand the settlements in the West Bank. >>


do you lie on purpose or are you a simple idiot?



The "Palestinaians" mostly left own their on accord..they were under the wrong impression that Isreal would be defeated in short order then they were planning to return to their homes once the Israelis were slaughtered.....bad decision.

This turned out to be a miscalculation when underestimating the Iaraelis and they were left stranded ...should have stayed where they were..

and where are all the rich Arab states and why aren't they supporting and caring for their fellow Arab brothers?


Lesson being..don't start a war then cry over the results when you get your ass kicked..


when we giving the Native Indians in this country back their land?

>>>>when we giving the Native Indians in this country back their land?


you mean like give them their own Israel?

I was responding to JerryC's assertion that Iran's 6 year warlike initiatives were peaceful overtures.

No you weren't because I never said that they were making peaceful overtures. They were defending themselves. I corrected your assertion that Iran started the war.

>The "Palestinaians" mostly left own their on accord..they were under the wrong impression that Isreal would be defeated in short order then they were planning to return to their homes once the Israelis were slaughtered<

What you fail to realize dumbfuck is that the Palestinians were given financial incentives to leave. That is their land was bought by the Jewish settlers, but according to Shlomo Ben Ami, the former Israeli foriegn minister this was only 6-7 percent of the population. He adds that many of them left because they were driven out:

“The reality on the ground was that of an Arab community in a state of terror facing a ruthless Israeli army whose path to victory was paved not only by its exploits against the regular Arab armies, but also by the intimidation and at times atrocities and massacres it perpetrated against the civilian Arab community. A panic-stricken Arab community was uprooted under the impact of massacres that would be carved into the Arabs’ monument of grief and hatred.”

“Israel, as a society, also suppressed the memory of its war against the local Palestinians, because it couldn’t really come to terms with the fact that it expelled Arabs, committed atrocities against them, dispossessed them. This was like admitting that the noble Jewish dream of statehood was stained forever by a major injustice committed against the Palestinians and that the Jewish state was born in sin.”

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/democracy-now-deb ate-with-finkelstein-shlomo-ben-ami/

Many other Israeli/ Jeiwsh academics such as Benny Morris, Noam Chomsky, Tom Segev, all make a similar claim to Ben Ami. And i tell you this cause when dumbfuck Bert can't confront the arguments against Israel, he resorts to accusations of anti semetism which are bullshit considering my sources.....

>and where are all the rich Arab states and why aren't they supporting and caring for their fellow Arab brothers? <

Cause they care as much about the Palestinians as the Israelis do.... The fact is dumbfuck the existence of Israel is beneficial to the Arab dictatorships. They can divert attention away from their own corrupt leadership by blaming everything on Israel. That's another reason why Iran will never annihilate Israel (unless they feel they have no choice). With Israel gone, who are the Arab states going to blame??? No answer, dumbfuck???

>when we giving the Native Indians in this country back their land?<

It's not that much an unrealistic proposition. The Canadians , particularly in British Columbia, have been talking about Native Indian self government for some time and have made some strides to achieving it. What's unrealistic is that all the land be given back, but since this isn't going to be done the US (and Canada) should at least treat them as equal citizens and address the social dysfunction that has been placed on Native Indian populations by the past and on going process of colonization.... Same thing should happen to the Palestinians: Give them some of their land back or/and treat them as equals within a Jewish/Palestinian secular state....

I thought selling both sides of the Iran-Iraq war weapons was true genius.

(Look up the history of the Walker (Bush)family fortune...long history of selling arms to both sides.)

Throughout the 19th century, Jews were persecuted and discriminated against. Sometimes whole communities were forced to convert. During the 19th century, there was considerable emigration to the Land of Israel, and the Zionist movement spread throughout the community.

jews have a history of persecution??? No fucking way! Glad that u know at least something bert. Perhaps now u can tell me how this actually relates to what i wrote... Further enlighten me.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-s emitism/iranjews.html