The Debates

[franklin]

I don't doubt their sincerity.

However, it's a mistake to blame Obama for the partisan nature of this debate. He's been a centrist, willing to work with Congress, and compromised on many points (which you regularly bring up as broken promises or flip-flops). The Democratic Party generally, and Obama specifically, has not moved left since the days of Clinton or even Reagan. It's the Republicans who have moved right, away from let's-get-it-done and toward my-way-or-the-highway, to the point where, at a time when we have lower taxes than pretty much at any point in past 100 years, tax hikes are being decried as socialist and abortion-prevention mesures like birth control pills are repression. The Republicans, intentiallonally or not, benefit from the Golden Mean fallacy to a huge degree.



Some people are getting so partisan that they say a claim of "hyperbolic" is "demonization" of the speakier.

So you're refusing to read the two page letter huh?

 

[Stoked]

Yes, but we didn't want to set you off by correcting yous.

Oh ********. If I am wrong and it is pointed out to me I have shown myself more than willign to correct my mistake and apologize if necessary.

 

[One Brow]

So you're refusing to read the two page letter huh?

Do you think I just guessed that the letter blamed Obama for the partisan nature of this political discussion? Or, am I sickic?

 

[The Thriller]

Actually, (as much as I dislike Republicans) the Tea Party and Occupy movements have been forcing Republicans to follow a more constitutional platform.

This is extremely subjective. On one hand the TP has called for a more limited fed government economically and environmentally. It is still debatable whether that's even a good thing! However, I still see the TP wanting to mess with social issues and calling for even greater government intervention. And they still are addicted to their old folks entitlements. As for foreign affairs? The TP is calling for even greater American influence and intervention in the world. Not only was this left undefined in the Constitution and thus (by default) unconstitutional, but also goes against the warnings of some of the greatest leaders we had at the time the Constitution was written.

Where were their concerns over 8 years? They were silent under Bush and then suddenly became vocal once Obama was elected. This raises concerns over their true intentions and motives.

Your my-way-or-the-highway point doesn't really have any merit when they're just following the constitution, when Democrats completely supersede the document.

So quickly we forget the party which gave us the Patriot Act, NCLB, and 2 wars against 2 countries which didn't attack us. I have a hard time that the Republicans have "purged" all their addiction to big government and immoral wars in just 4 years.

Lastly, who says that going "back" to follow the Constitution would be a good thing? I'm not saying we should or shouldn't. IMO, I think in some cases we definitely need to cut government and "return" to the Constitution (NCLB, foreign affairs, Pat Act, PBS funding, etc). On other issues, we need MORE government intervention (Regulate WS, break up the big banks, health care).

But if the past 200+ years have proven anything, the Constitution was written for those who lived hundreds of years ago. It was adapted to their needs and issues. They intended for it to be adjusted and changed to meet the needs of the future generations. Many most likely foresaw a day where slavery would be abolished. Unfortunately, at that time, they couldn't... Not without half the colonies freaking out. It was intended to be a living and breathing document which helped this country not hindered it. If we couldn't change or adjust the Constitution, African Americans would still be slaves, the Air Force would be illegal (or divided up to states to control), and women wouldn't be able to vote.

 

[franklin]

Well, as long as he's not being hyperbolic. Seriously 120%? He's rapidly going broke? More likely, his main income is investments, which dwarfs his slary and bonuses, and he pays a lower rate than I do. Class warfare means he'd be expected to pay as a similar percentage to me.

Partisan failure to account for various forms of income and discount accordingly. Assuming worst case. Auto-siding against the rich guy, no matter what he may or may not actually be doing for society.

Because the President who support bailing out GM and propping up the Wall Street Banks is such a huge threat to capitalism? Really?

This clearly demonstrates you did not read the letter before reacting.

I don't doubt their sincerity.

However, it's a mistake to blame Obama for the partisan nature of this debate. He's been a centrist, willing to work with Congress, and compromised on many points (which you regularly bring up as broken promises or flip-flops). The Democratic Party generally, and Obama specifically, has not moved left since the days of Clinton or even Reagan. It's the Republicans who have moved right, away from let's-get-it-done and toward my-way-or-the-highway, to the point where, at a time when we have lower taxes than pretty much at any point in past 100 years, tax hikes are being decried as socialist and abortion-prevention mesures like birth control pills are repression. The Republicans, intentiallonally or not, benefit from the Golden Mean fallacy to a huge degree.



Some people are getting so partisan that they say a claim of "hyperbolic" is "demonization" of the speakier.

Do you think I just guessed that the letter blamed Obama for the partisan nature of this political discussion? Or, am I sickic?

"Rise above"?

Mr. Cooperman was advising President Obama to take the high ground of a leader and not wallow in the seven deadly sins that destroy societies, which Obama is clearly guilty of promoting at all costs. If you were psychic then you would have read this main theme of the letter.

 

[mellow]

I don't doubt their sincerity.

However, it's a mistake to blame Obama for the partisan nature of this debate. He's been a centrist, willing to work with Congress, and compromised on many points (which you regularly bring up as broken promises or flip-flops).

If Obama did not contribute to the partisan nature of the debate it was only because he had no telapromter there to provide the script for him. Everything out of his scripted mouth is partisan and calculated to divide. In my opinion he has done more to contribute to the partisan divide of the country than any one not named Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Keith Oberman. He frequently says my way or no-way, and just as frequently bypasses congress to get his agenda done. Thats no different than Bush or Clinton, but to say Obama is a centrist comprimser free of partisan politics is just not true.

 

[One Brow]

Partisan failure to account for various forms of income and discount accordingly. Assuming worst case. Auto-siding against the rich guy, no matter what he may or may not actually be doing for society.

Which other forms of income might be relevant? Wynn referred to wages and bonues, I added in captial gains. Do you think he makes a lot in tips? Also, since when is noting hyperbole the same as "siding against him"?

This clearly demonstrates you did not read the letter before reacting.

You are correct that, at the time of post 402086, I had not read the letter. I did read it before making post 402106.

Mr. Cooperman was advising President Obama to take the high ground of a leader and not wallow in the seven deadly sins that destroy societies, which Obama is clearly guilty of promoting at all costs. If you were psychic then you would have read this main theme of the letter.

But what I can justifiably hold you accountable for is your and your minions' role in setting the tenor of the rancorous debate now roiling us that smacks of what so many have characterized as "class warfare". ... What does matter is that the divisive, polarizing tone of your rhetoric is cleaving a widening gulf, at this point as much visceral as philosophical, between the downtrodden and those best positioned to help them.

Which of the seven deadly sins is "polarizing rhetoric", again? In what way is Obama's rhetoric polarizing? Please be specific about how Obama is trying to divide, rather than unite. I don't hear Obama saying the rich are the problem, I hear him asking them to help the country out.

 

[One Brow]

Everything out of his scripted mouth is partisan and calculated to divide.

He can't change the color of his skin. I'd like to think your statement really came down to something else, truly. but the reality is that he's reached across the aisle many times, and compromised with Republicans when offering ideas that were Republican to begin with. So, I have no other explanation for your statement. It's like the woman who insisted she's not a racist, nosiree, it's just that Micelle Obama doesn't act like a First Lady because she wears shorts.

He frequently says my way or no-way, and just as frequently bypasses congress to get his agenda done.

Name one issue where Obama's initial position was my-way-or-no-way. I agree that he has bypassed Congress on occasion, when Congress refuses to act. On the other hand, he appointed Republicans to his Cabinet.

Thats no different than Bush or Clinton, but to say Obama is a centrist comprimser free of partisan politics is just not true.

So, which Presidents do you see as centrist compromisers? By the definition of bypassing Congress, every President since 1900 has been partisan.

Of course, I'm not arguing that Obama is free of partisanship. I'm just noting where the real rancor is coming from.

 

[Stoked]

He can't change the color of his skin. I'd like to think your statement really came down to something else, truly. but the reality is that he's reached across the aisle many times, and compromised with Republicans when offering ideas that were Republican to begin with. So, I have no other explanation for your statement. It's like the woman who insisted she's not a racist, nosiree, it's just that Micelle Obama doesn't act like a First Lady because she wears shorts.



Name one issue where Obama's initial position was my-way-or-no-way. I agree that he has bypassed Congress on occasion, when Congress refuses to act. On the other hand, he appointed Republicans to his Cabinet.



So, which Presidents do you see as centrist compromisers? By the definition of bypassing Congress, every President since 1900 has been partisan.

Of course, I'm not arguing that Obama is free of partisanship. I'm just noting where the real rancor is coming from.

There it is. I was wondering how long you would be able to hold out. I'm impressed to be honest.

 

[One Brow]

There it is. I was wondering how long you would be able to hold out. I'm impressed to be honest.

I only work with what I'm given.

Everything out of his scripted mouth is partisan and calculated to divide.

Do you think this assessment of Obama is in any way rational?

 

[Stoked]

I only work with what I'm given.



Do you think this assessment of Obama is in any way rational?

Do I believe it? No. However it is more rational than automatically assuming that he must say that because he is racist. No you didn't say that but we both know that is exactly what you were implying.

I think Obama has been divisive on some issues and non divisive on others.

Further polls updates. Obamas lead in WI, N.H., PA and NV continues to shrink. WI and N.H. have moved back into "toss up" from "lean Obama". Romney is up to 1% lead nationally in the average of polls.

 

[One Brow]

Do I believe it? No. However it is more rational than automatically assuming that he must say that because he is racist.

Of course I think he's human and living in the American culture. What else would I think?

 

[Stoked]

Of course I think he's human and living in the American culture. What else would I think?

Oh so to you an American in this culture is automatically racist? That says about all that needs to be said.

On a side note Obama went from 269 E.C. votes to 217 E.C. votes in 6 days. The debate was terrible for Obama.

 

[The Thriller]

Everything out of his scripted mouth is partisan and calculated to divide. In my opinion he has done more to contribute to the partisan divide of the country than any one not named Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Keith Oberman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnB0NZzl5HA

These types of speeches aren't partisan nor do they divide our country...

Of course, we repubs would never say or do anything partisan... They have America's best wishes in mind... I mean, there's no way the Senate Minority Leader would ever vow to make Obama a one-term President, right???

 

[PearlWatson]

Biden hasn't been interviewed in 5 months. This should be fun to watch.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Biden's a seasoned debater so it won't be some Ryan beatdown. But we should also see plenty of Joe gaffes.

 

[Stoked]

Biden's a seasoned debater so it won't be some Ryan beatdown. But we should also see plenty of Joe gaffes.

That is what I would do if I was Ryan. I'd work Bidens own gaffes into attacks on his policy. Soemthing along the lines of.

"You yourself said that the middle class has been buried for the last 4 years. So how can you justify a stay the course policy on job creation and the debt?"

 

[One Brow]

Oh so to you an American in this culture is automatically racist? That says about all that needs to be said.

We have discussed this before. Yes, all Americans, and pretty much all people. Some of us recognize it more, and try to counter it more. That's pretty much the difference.

 

[mellow]

Well I'm convinced that one Brow is actually a chatterbot. Whomever programed it was attempting to frustrate people by employing a number of logical fallicies and loose reasoning. If all other inputs fail to register, it simply spits out 'racist'. As a machine it has no sense of humour, or tact and has difficulty recognizing sarcasm.

Rather than being frustrated by onebrow I will instead be awed by the skills of whomever programed it. To help clear up the confusion I will from now on call it ELIZA, to honor the first chatterbot.

I am now ignoring ELIZA. Thank jazzfanz for the ignore switch.

 

[sirkickyass]

Dear franklin,

I'm sorry that Cooperman had his feelings hurt because he doesn't think he gets enough respect for all that money he made.

-Non-conservatives who read that letter.