I'll show you mine if you show me yours....

[VINYLONE]

Fixed that for you.

Why? Because I believe risk and failure are integral parts of capitalism?

 

[DeliveryBoy]

Registered Independent, vote Dem more often than not. I won't register with a party until we get rid of the electoral college and go with some form of popular vote. Obama supporter, although I have always contended that he was the best of two bad options. I loved Jon Huntsman Jr when he was Governor, and he'd be the only guy that I'd even consider voting for over Obama.

I think the two most important issues we face as a society are wealth inequality and campaign finance, followed closely by a number of environmental issues (water, climate change, etc.) I'm only radical and ideological about campaign finance-I view the other two simply as problems that need to be addressed. I'm pro-capitalism and private industry, but I think the flaws and dangers are apparent and have to be dealt with.

I try not to think about morality when it comes to politics. I focus on practicality, and the effects any given policy will have. I don't think of many positions as "right" or "wrong." I prefer simple, gradual change to radical, drastic change.

I think the issues we talk about most often are far, far different than the issues we should be talking about. I think our political debates, especially among regular people, aren't honest enough, and driven by factoids and scripted lines fed to us by our preferred biased media outlet.

Pro-gay people, pro-abortion, pro-gun (though not all the time, some restrictions are needed), pro-liquor, pro-weed, pro-legal prostitution, pro-labor but not necessarily pro-union, anti-religion but pro-respecting other peoples' religious choice, pro-science, anti-vegan but pro-eating less meat.

So, yeah. I guess pretty typical of my generation (I'm 24.)

 

[VINYLONE]

anti-vegan

Please explain.

 

[babe]

I'm the only person that has so far responded that I'm a registered member of either party. Riiiiiiiiight. I'm sure that reflects reality.

Let me decode some of these.



I actually think you and I are in virtual lockstep on this issue, so I'm not certain why you called me out by name here.



This would make you an Eisenhower Republican. Congratulations, you are currently represented by nobody.



This is highly disturbing.

Let me guess: Good is your way of thinking and Evil is against your way of thinking.



You're a liberal. Don't run from it. Embrace it. No one is fooled.



Fixed that for you.



Barely above an anarchist.

Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin and a lot of other signers of the Declaration of Independence were more courageous than I in taking my stand. I know Canadians might sorta question why the colonies revolted from their queen, but it was the Americans who picked up the line of advancement in human rights and took it to the next level.

Overall, their idea of government was that it should be restricted to the narrowest definition of essential things to keep the United States strong enough to remain free and free enough to prosper.

That's why I signed on with the Constitution Party a few years ago, but I have to admit I like Ralph Nader too, and some of the Libertarian leaders.

I know a fair number of people who would be ashamed if anyone knew they once voted for Carter, Bush, or Clinton. . . . because they were all disappointments. . . . I was confessing that I sometimes feel ashamed to be a citizen of a country that goes around the world strutin' our military hardware and imposing our corporate interests on people who never got to vote on what we're doing. In the short run it's "useless foreign wars", in the long run it will backfire on us and hurt us all.Our founders had a revolutionary ideal of human liberty but they did not seek to go out and impose it on other nations. Their foreign policy was "Alliance with none, Commerce with all."

We don't need to have American-owned oil cartels pumping the arab oil. We just need a desireable stable currency and a lot of stuff we can exchange at a fair price for what we need.

SirKicky, like a lot of fairly smart liberals, is inverting the American value system and thinking in terms of governance needs, convenience for the managerial class, over what would happen if people were making their own decisions. A lot of folks have the librarian mentality. Sure they've read a lot of books and have a lot of good ideas of how things can be improved in the world, and somehow they have inserted themselves into the equation as somehow wiser than others and fit to make the decisions for others. While individuals might check books out from the same library, they are free to subsequently think things over and maybe do something better than the books say. It's not for a few very smart people to guide mankind and assume control of governance, it's for people to choose to take responsibility for themselves and act in their own chosen way, and direct their government.

That's why there was an American Revolution.
:

 

[The-Joker]

Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin and a lot of other signers of the Declaration of Independence were more courageous than I in taking my stand. I know Canadians might sorta question why the colonies revolted from their queen, but it was the Americans who picked up the line of advancement in human rights and took it to the next level.

Overall, their idea of government was that it should be restricted to the narrowest definition of essential things to keep the United States strong enough to remain free and free enough to prosper.

That's why I signed on with the Constitution Party a few years ago, but I have to admit I like Ralph Nader too, and some of the Libertarian leaders.

I know a fair number of people who would be ashamed if anyone knew they once voted for Carter, Bush, or Clinton. . . . because they were all disappointments. . . . I was confessing that I sometimes feel ashamed to be a citizen of a country that goes around the world strutin' our military hardware and imposing our corporate interests on people who never got to vote on what we're doing. In the short run it's "useless foreign wars", in the long run it will backfire on us and hurt us all.Our founders had a revolutionary ideal of human liberty but they did not seek to go out and impose it on other nations. Their foreign policy was "Alliance with none, Commerce with all."

We don't need to have American-owned oil cartels pumping the arab oil. We just need a desireable stable currency and a lot of stuff we can exchange at a fair price for what we need.

SirKicky, like a lot of fairly smart liberals, is inverting the American value system and thinking in terms of governance needs, convenience for the managerial class, over what would happen if people were making their own decisions. A lot of folks have the librarian mentality. Sure they've read a lot of books and have a lot of good ideas of how things can be improved in the world, and somehow they have inserted themselves into the equation as somehow wiser than others and fit to make the decisions for others. While individuals might check books out from the same library, they are free to subsequently think things over and maybe do something better than the books say. It's not for a few very smart people to guide mankind and assume control of governance, it's for people to choose to take responsibility for themselves and act in their own chosen way, and direct their government.

That's why there was an American Revolution.
:

*sheds tear
*waves flag
...











*kills self

 

[PearlWatson]

I've been exposing myself for like 4 months already.

I'm conservative with babe leanings.
Democrats never represent me. Republicans sometimes do.
I registered Republican to vote in the primary.
Reasoned and/or witty political banter appeals to me.
I have to respect someone to be swayed by them.
Sometimes I get so disturbed by the state of my country (or the Jazz) I have to watch a chick flick
or read a Jane Austen novel.
I wouldn't be writing this if I wasn't extremely tired but unable to sleep.

 

[franklin]

I actually think you and I are in virtual lockstep on this issue, so I'm not certain why you called me out by name here.

Only for a little contrast. I'm sure I'm somewhere to the right of you on the transfer payments issue.

My biggest hiccup is I don't see how we could have sucked up all the slack through capital projects and by QE devaluation efforts alone. I also don't see how extending unemployment benefits to infinity makes things better either (for starters, it may be the trap that holds underwater borrowers from economic liberation a la 'jingle mail'). I'm agnostic on the issue instead of lockstep with either side.

I'd like to hear a little more of Pearl's suggestions (and should point out I disagree they should be deficit financed).

 

[franklin]

Registered Independent, vote Dem more often than not. I won't register with a party until we get rid of the electoral college and go with some form of popular vote. Obama supporter, although I have always contended that he was the best of two bad options. I loved Jon Huntsman Jr when he was Governor, and he'd be the only guy that I'd even consider voting for over Obama.

You think Obama is a bad option but Huntsman is the only better candidate?

IMO you'd serve yourself better by voting in the republican primaries and trying to either sway the party back to the middle or vote in the R version of a Blue Dog.

 

[One Brow]

Nah. You wrote you were "moderate, leaning left." I see that and think "blue dog Dem." That's not you.

See, when you say "blue dog Dem", my thought is "moderate to conservative Democrat, but less conseravtive that a Repupublican from that state ususally is". Which of the blue dog Dems actually leant left, as opposed to being democrats?

 

[moevillini]

I chose the option "Moderate, leaning left"

I am not registered to any party. I think I've voted for the Democratic candidate for US President almost exclusively. In the primary elections, where in Illinois you have to choose to take either the Republican ballot or the Democratic ballot, my choice generally depends on the specific races and where the more compelling choices are across the board. In general, at least at the state level, we've had better candidates on the Republican side.

(case in point, Rod Blagojevic)


Sometimes I feel my choices depend on who I'm angry at more than anything. I suppose that's not the best way to make a decision, but I try to be reasonable about it.

(yeah, I'm sure some of you are shaking your heads...)

 

[TroutBum]

I'm a registered Dem. For the most part I can't stand the republican agenda, and the fools that spew it as if it's THE only way to go.

 

[LogGrad98]

I'm a registered Dem. For the most part I can't stand the republican agenda, and the fools that spew it as if it's THE only way to go.

Just curious, what do you think about the fools that spew the democratic agenda as if it's THE only way to go? That door swings both ways.

 

[TroutBum]

Just curious, what do you think about the fools that spew the democratic agenda as if it's THE only way to go? That door swings both ways.

Good call, I should've been more clear.

I can't stand both sides. Hannity, Rush, Beck, Savage, Olberman, Colbert, Stewart, etc. I wouldn't piss on them to put out a fire. We have versions of them here, The Thriller, MillHopper, KOC BEGONE, etc. I am very interested in hearing both sides, as long as they're delivered in a non-dumbass sort of way. For example, The Pearl, Duck (sometimes), Tink, Franklin, and OneBrow are people that I will listen to what they have to say with an open mind. I probably won't chime in on any of their conversations (because I'm a moron), but I do ponder a lot of the crap they talk about.

 

[LogGrad98]

Good call, I should've been more clear.

I can't stand both sides. Hannity, Rush, Beck, Savage, Olberman, Colbert, Stewart, etc. I wouldn't piss on them to put out a fire. We have versions of them here, The Thriller, MillHopper, KOC BEGONE, etc. I am very interested in hearing both sides, as long as they're delivered in a non-dumbass sort of way. For example, The Pearl, Duck (sometimes), Tink, Franklin, and OneBrow are people that I will listen to what they have to say with an open mind. I probably won't chime in on any of their conversations (because I'm a moron), but I do ponder a lot of the crap they talk about.

Agreed.

 

[franklin]

I probably won't chime in on any of their conversations (because I'm a moron)

Or because you're a smart salesman. Guys like you should get a special exemption to the one account rule. One for your regular activity and one for sensitive topics that might push business away.

 

[Duck Rodgers]

This is highly disturbing.

Let me guess: Good is your way of thinking and Evil is against your way of thinking.

No. I'll admit I do get a little confused how people can debate things like what constitutes murder, theft, deception, and wanton criminality. Those are things that are extremely clear to me. Not much grey area there. But when our leaders are active participants in all of those areas, I don't expect everyone to be able to point out right and wrong because we are all taught that these people are good.

There is no Jewish conspiracy, there aren't Muslims in caves tossing around the nuclear football, and the people that campaign as Christians are more often than not anything but. There is a British-Anglo satanic empire(with a few very powerful Arabs, blacks, and Asians tossed in for good measure) however and they only fear one thing - Christianity.

 

[VINYLONE]

Jeezus.

https://www.pimco.com/EN/Insights/Pages/Skunked.aspx

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Socially I am left. When its comes to government/economics I lean more towards the right.

 

[sirkickyass]

Only for a little contrast. I'm sure I'm somewhere to the right of you on the transfer payments issue.

Probably. I recognize the problems with transfer payments, I just don't think we're in the nightmare moral hazard scenarios that the right asserts. And frankly, I think they'll assert the extreme moral hazard for as long as New Deal-style programs exist.

I can't stand both sides. Hannity, Rush, Beck, Savage, Olberman, Colbert, Stewart, etc. I wouldn't piss on them to put out a fire.

Let's dissect this some. Do you really think Colbert and Stewart are the same thing as Hannity, Rush and Beck? Either in terms of the size of their megaphone (regular listeners/viewers), type of rhetoric, or ability to sink individuals in their party?

Or because you're a smart salesman. Guys like you should get a special exemption to the one account rule. One for your regular activity and one for sensitive topics that might push business away.

I would actually support said special exemption.

There is a British-Anglo satanic empire

What the hell does this mean? Google was no help.

 

[VINYLONE]

Probably. I recognize the problems with transfer payments, I just don't think we're in the nightmare moral hazard scenarios that the right asserts. And frankly, I think they'll assert the extreme moral hazard for as long as New Deal-style programs exist.

Tell that to Bill Gross.