KaskadskyjKozak

Keep making up the positions of others - then it's easier to debate them!!

Of course, calling me names is easier than explaining why you supported (and still supported them as of just not too long ago) the wars, the tax cuts, "Free" Trade, etc ... yet "not favor deficits". Perhaps if you explained why you keep flip-flopping, it'd be easier to track what you stand for. You can't even find common ground or let someone agree with you on anything if they disagree with you on most things. Obviously you have some sort of psychosis. "I agree that we need more regulation in the financial sector" "No you don't, you never have!" "Um, yes, I do" "No you don't! No, no no!" :shakehead:

I can only assess the positions you defend and you have yet to support any attempt at re-regulating the markets (or anything else for that matter). Don't fool yourself, the way you fall in all of these discussions is obvious to everyone. Right, you don't favor deficits. You only supported the policies that caused the deficit. You are a lunatic.

Nobody claimed that what Obama proposed was sufficient but at least it's going in the right direction by opposition to Cain's proposal to lower taxation on the rich. There are many ways to go a long toward decreasing the deficit caused by tax cuts for the wealthy, military adventurism, payoffs to big pharma (and other boondoggles) , and the financial crisis caused by deregulation of the financial sector (all policies that you likely supported btw). Cracking down on tax havens alone would net over $100billions/year, and we won't discuss taxing capital gain as if it were income. How many years till you flip flop again to not worrying about deficits? Firstly I don't support all deregulation policies. I know if makes your simpleminded worldview a lot easier to pigeon-hole everyone that disagrees with your ideas of statism, but it only makes you look like a fool over and over again. I have never favored deficit spending, and W's overspending was over the top, and I never supported it. Barry and our current congress are even worse.

Yes, that's why they should give creationism equal time with evolution. FAIR AND BALANCED! don't be a kook, rob.

it's also rather silly to think me an extremist - i don't really give enough of a shit about the world to urge or undergo any radical redrawing of the way things have always been, a necessary qualification for extremists on either side of the spectrum, no? - like jim morrision, i just wanna get my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames apathetic wannabe climber moderatish liberalism is about all i can aspire too Just a little bit of tit-for-tat hyperbole for you, Vanya...

i think you've misquoted/misinterpreted me, but am not quite enough an internet-psycho to go searching through 100,000 posts to get to the heart of it actually, page 1 of all my class syllabi states my official role as "devil's advocate," to tell them they're wrong no matter what they think - it also says that, while i set myself the goal of being as neutral as i can see to be (and our opinion of what is "unbiased" is just that, afterall, an opinion, and to say hitler was an asshole is certainly a biased statement, but one few would believe to be), any student with half a brain and a bit of interest will be able to see exactly what my true political opinions are after a few weeks of close observation, and that they'd be as wrong to swallow my true opinions hook and all as those of their friends, parents n' priests. at any rate, the role of a public teacher is of necessity different from a newsman. i have a choice to not watch an admittedly conservative talking tv-head, my kids don't get a choice about showing up for class though. You previously stated that many students are surprised when you tell them at the end of the year/after they are no longer students what your true beliefs are. Journalists (like teachers) should strive to be balanced in reporting (teaching) and aware of personal biases. It's really not that hard.

Wrong plane. The F-35 is the one that's helping bankrupt us. And yes, boner, military cuts, along with cuts to other programs and some tax increases all need to happen.

Damned dirty hippies!

99%!! Just tax the millionaires and we can keep spending all we want and more! Really!

An 800 billion dollar deficit in 2013. Meanwhile, our genius Barry is trying to tax millionaires which will net a whopping 40 billion a year. Yeah, Cain is a moron and Barry - like Prole and j_bot are smart.

It is up to Barry to prosecute those on Wall Street who are responsible for our mess. He's done nothing. I, for one, would favor the investigations/prosecutions. Bugger off, j_b, your simplistic world view just doesn't hold water.

pretty sure sarah palin needs no help in that regard i'm all for civility in politcs, but jesus christ, not calling a true asshole an asshole just muddies the water... Pearls from Bachman. Derision is an appropriate response to such nonsense. ''Normalization (of gayness) through desensitization. Very effective way to do this with a bunch of second graders, is take a picture of 'The Lion King' for instance, and a teacher might say, 'Do you know that the music for this movie was written by a gay man?' The message is: I'm better at what I do, because I'm gay.'' ''If we took away the minimum wage — if conceivably it was gone — we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.'' ''And what a bizarre time we're in, when a judge will say to little children that you can't say the pledge of allegiance, but you must learn that homosexuality is normal and you should try it.'' "Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.'' Agree that there's lots of crazy there - but neither Germany, Denmark, Sweden, or Switzerland have statutory minimum wages. They do have a process that accomplishes more or less the same thing for most workers, but in the case of Germany they've used the "Mini-jobs" that came out of the Hartz reforms to promote workforce participation at total pay levels that would have been impossible before these labor market reforms, and is an important part of the structural reforms that have driven down unemployment in Germany since ~2000. Anyone who generates less income for any employer than the employer is required to pay him is effectively unemployable. The less skilled and educated you are the more likely it is that you'll fall below that line. It'd be much more effective and compassionate to eliminate the minimum wage and use transfer mechanisms like the EIC to bring people's total incomes up to whatever standard the country decides is fair. Locking people out of the labor force prevents them from ever setting foot on the lowest rung of the economic ladder. This is much more detrimental to their long-term well being than having them work for whatever they employer is willing to pay them + whatever transfer payments the government kicks in to add to their total income. I'm always surprised by the depth of progressive opposition to eliminating the minimum wage in exchange for conditional transfer payments. I've literally had this discussion with someone who was working as an unpaid intern (wage = zero) who said that the skills and connections they were accumulating made it worthwhile, and made it much more likely that they'd get a job with a good salary afterwards. When asked to explain the difference between someone working for nothing for the chance to pick up skills and connections that might get them a better job later, and someone working for less than the minimum wage with the same objectives outside of a formal internship (even with the EIC) - this person insisted that that should remain illegal. Fascinating. Kind of like talking with a prostitute who's sermonizing on behalf of mandatory chastity laws for other people. The only thing sillier would be spending 15 minutes typing out this post... Sorry, but I disagree. The proposal you make is just another form of corporate welfare funded by the taxpayer. There should be a minimum wage, and it should be adjusted annually to allow for changes in cost of living. How high should be? Well, I definitely would not favor something on the level of some of our progressives here, but it should at least be comparable to say, the highest it has ever been in the past, adjusted for inflation into 2011 dollars. What would the impact be? I really doubt it would force employers not to hire, folks to be unemployed, etc. It would drive up some prices at places like Walmart and fast food franchises. Would it kill Americans to pay 7.50 for a #5 instead of 6.50?

ha!!! put "walter cronkite bias" into The Google and see what you get - there's no small # of folks who are convinced he was an evil liberal biased minion of the donkeys here's one of the gems: http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/cronkite/welcome.asp the news is oft called "the first draft of history" - so if history is inevitably biased, then so too must be its rough draft. again, bias is natural and not to be feared, especially when it's confronted up front. nothing is what it is, it is what we want and make it to be. On many occasions on this board you have claimed that as a school teacher you leave your bias at home and present your subject manner in a neutral way. I guess by your arguments above, that just is false. So you might start letting all your kids know you're a left wing extremist and consider any of them who happens to be R's to be "assholes" - and their parents too. Then, once you've given this full disclosure, you can be as biased as you want...

back in the day when you could read a thin book and understand most of a language... now you need a stack of a dozen or so 600+ page books...

pretty sure sarah palin needs no help in that regard i'm all for civility in politcs, but jesus christ, not calling a true asshole an asshole just muddies the water... Pearls from Bachman. Derision is an appropriate response to such nonsense. ''Normalization (of gayness) through desensitization. Very effective way to do this with a bunch of second graders, is take a picture of 'The Lion King' for instance, and a teacher might say, 'Do you know that the music for this movie was written by a gay man?' The message is: I'm better at what I do, because I'm gay.'' ''If we took away the minimum wage — if conceivably it was gone — we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.'' ''And what a bizarre time we're in, when a judge will say to little children that you can't say the pledge of allegiance, but you must learn that homosexuality is normal and you should try it.'' "Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.'' Bachman is losing.

We aren't talking about global warming (gee, what has Barry done about that, BTW?) - we are talking about tax reform. Barry proposed something like a 5.6% surtax on all individuals making more than 1 million. Kain proposed this 999 plan. Plenty of room here for discussion - of facts, without calling people morons or assholes.

basic social studies - there is no such thing as an "unbiased" history. better to have your bias up front and center so everyone can take that into consideration when sorting out their own personal version of "truth." We are not talking about history, we're talking about reporting. And yes, you can be unbiased. Did anyone know what Walter Cronkite's politics were when he reported? That's how it should be.

trying to appeal to assholes (the republican base) = being an asshole yourself ow's spot-on. BS. You have to argue your points at all time to get them out there. If you can't do it effectively, that's your problem.

Heaven forbid that someone dare come to a different conclusion than you, or see things differently! They must all be IDIOTS!

I agree. The Republican Party has been taken over by the right fringe and folks that might have a reasonably moderate bone in their body, Mitt included, are constantly covering their right flank. The press is pretty lame at calling most of the field what they are, blathering idiots. It's not he press's job to call people "blathering idiots". That's part of the problem of you progressives. The press should report in an unbiased manner and let the people make their own judgement. If an idea is "wacko" it's up to those who think it so to argue a better point. I'm disappointed you are going with this intellectually vapid shortcut, Jim.

Not a productive tack, OW. Each candidate is trying to appeal to the base to win the nomination, and one has to ask why certain ideas get support and argue against those ideas without being an elitist ass (I have contempt for you wackos!)

Acting is a great qualifying skill for politicians, Ivan! And Ronnie did a few things between the first and running for prez. Jon Stewart, OTOH... comedians aren't actors? just shooting the shit, mind you. politicians usually spend most of their lives being politicians, but there's alwasy room for gifted amateurs? populists sure don't like the status quo. shit, forgot this guy! and another republicant to boot! Don't forget Stuart Smalley.

As if Cain, Bachmann, Trump, Gramm, Palin, Norquist, Koch et al. deserve anything but the contempt of concerned, rational people? That anyone, much less journalists, takes this crap seriously blows my mind. If the last few years has taught us anything about American conservatism in its current form, it's that you don't negotiate with terrorists. You've just articulated exactly why you are not a serious person to discuss anything of substance. Your "contempt" for vast swaths of those you disagree with is obvious. Don't expect respect in return.