Democrat Demolition Derby, Redux

[Ssnake]

DK, if you want childish exercises in absurdism, why don't you let us hear your feeble attempts at a definition. Oh wait, we don't need it. By extrapolating your point I suppose your position is that only zero taxation and not having a budget (or a state) is the only form of fiscal conservativism that you'd accept.

Fine then, why don't you play outside a bit?

[Rick]

 

Define "fiscal conservatism."

 

How about "don't run a fiscal deficit unless you're in a severe recession"

 

Not a bad beginning, but imo, the first question is what should you be spending tax dollars on? In the U.S., only those items that the Constitution originally prescribed. What federal spending should never be spent on is welfare and education as the failures of both are evident now. Money is power, the more centrally located the money, the more centralized the power. The world is full of examples of the evil of too much centralized power, a deplorable development that has been occurring in the U.S. via liberalism and its infection of the Democratic Party.

[Murph]

Biden will be replaced at the convention with the preferred candidate. The fix is in. Look for Hillary or Michelle Obama.

[DKTanker]

DK, if you want childish exercises in absurdism, why don't you let us hear your feeble attempts at a definition. Oh wait, we don't need it. By extrapolating your point I suppose your position is that only zero taxation and not having a budget (or a state) is the only form of fiscal conservativism that you'd accept.

Fine then, why don't you play outside a bit?

Why are you so upset with me for pointing out the absurdity of your definition? Personally I don't think there is a good definition of "fiscal conservative," I do think it's a way for people to have their cake and eat it too. They support all manner of Leftist programs and ideology, they're socially liberal. But they want the budget balanced, fiscally conservative. To my way of thinking those two propositions are at odds unless taxation increases ever more and more.

[GregShaw]

Don't spend more money than you make. Simplistic, yes, but easy to understand. Those of us in the real world have to abide by that, government should as well.

[Jeff]

Don't spend more money than you make. Simplistic, yes, but easy to understand. Those of us in the real world have to abide by that, government should as well.

How does that work when the government can take what it wants and print what it wants? I'd be happy to live within my means if I could just keep charging my credit card and use my printer every time I wanted something. Hey, look at me, I'm fiscally conservative!

[DKTanker]

 

Don't spend more money than you make. Simplistic, yes, but easy to understand. Those of us in the real world have to abide by that, government should as well.

How does that work when the government can take what it wants and print what it wants? I'd be happy to live within my means if I could just keep charging my credit card and use my printer every time I wanted something. Hey, look at me, I'm fiscally conservative!

 

Using a printer costs money, especially the ink or toner, so I think it would be more correct to say you would use your neighbor's printer to make your new money.

 

 

[Ssnake]

How does that work when the government can take what it wants and print what it wants?

 

A Republic, if you can keep it.

 

The government is bound by laws. So you must ensure to have laws restricting that government. Which is parliament's job. Parliament approves the budget. There is no way to guarantee that Parliament will only pass smart laws. That's why we have elections, to kick out respresentatives that weren't any good. But that decision rests with the constituents, which brings us back to the opening statement. If you want protection against human nature, good luck with that. Ben Franklin already said that to Ms Powel, when asked why they shouldn't be able to keep it.

 

Because the people, on tasting the dish, are always disposed to eat more of it than does them good.

[Rick]

 

How does that work when the government can take what it wants and print what it wants?

 

A Republic, if you can keep it.

 

The government is bound by laws. So you must ensure to have laws restricting that government. Which is parliament's job. Parliament approves the budget. There is no way to guarantee that Parliament will only pass smart laws. That's why we have elections, to kick out respresentatives that weren't any good. But that decision rests with the constituents, which brings us back to the opening statement. If you want protection against human nature, good luck with that. Ben Franklin already said that to Ms Powel, when asked why they shouldn't be able to keep it.

 

Because the people, on tasting the dish, are always disposed to eat more of it than does them good.

 

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”

― Alexis de Tocqueville

[Skywalkre]

Joe Biden won because of the black vote. For some reason, Bernie didnt appeal to the black community. Joe Bidens long term support of the community and his loyal service to the only black president counted.

 

This was something I recall getting a lot of attention back in '16. The best explanation I remember seeing was that it's an intertwining of the Black community's view of the importance of personal connections to those who supported the community and not abandoning them. Thus Hillary being the wife of Clinton (apparently very popular in the Black community) and Biden being the VP to Obama trumps all the effort Sanders made during the civil rights movement.

 

When Bernie Bros pointed out how Bernie did more decades ago then Clinton and Obama did recently that only seemed to harden the resolve of many Black voters to stick with Hillary and Biden (which, to be fair, just seems to be human nature... we have folks on here who do the same).

Edited April 17, 2020 by Skywalkre

[Skywalkre]

 

 

 

 

The D party may be the antithesis to many on here but at the end of the day a majority of its members aren't the bad guys some make them out to be. They turned down Sanders yet again and firmly rejected the most radical ideas he pushed for. If we tried working with them instead of vilifying them we might actually be able to get something meaningful done in this country.

Apparently the D party isn't the antithesis to your way of thinking, else you wouldn't be suggesting constitutional conservatives should be moving to the left to get something meaningful done. Here's a novel thought, why don't you try convincing your friends of the left to work with constitutional conservatives instead of vilifying them so something meaningful can get done?

 

 

Because he's a real conservative, just ask him.

 

Don't have to ask me anything. Try reading what I write. (Crazy thought, I know!)

 

(Though I will add, when it comes to fiscal conservatism there's no doubt I'm one of the few compared to the majority of you on here... )

 

Define "fiscal conservatism."

 

 

Ssnake already hit the big point - strive for a balanced budget (with notable exceptions, such as the pandemic we're in now).

 

There's more to it than that, though. At its core fiscal conservatism is about the government being involved in day-to-day life at its absolute minimum. Thus we'd see lower taxes (you're striving for no unnecessary spending), fewer regulations, etc.

 

But not running a debt unless in dire times is the big one. Debt is nothing more than a tax on future generations. Thus fiscal conservatism is about being fair (to future generations) and sustainable (something in place now won't eventually fuck over future generations). This is why I've harped on our lack of attention to the looming problems with Medicare and SS. At the rate they're set to expand and eat into the Fed budget in the coming decades the only obvious result is that the Defense budget will get axed hard... and yet when I bring this up I get crickets from folks on here. Apparently a place like TankNet is fine with the Defense budget getting destroyed in coming years. Who would've thunk it?

[Skywalkre]

 

 

 

He certainly didn't run a perfect campaign but at the same time he always had his work cut out for him. Polling from the start showed he'd have trouble after that initial wave of primaries. When other candidates dropped out few of their supporters went over to Sanders camp (in particular Warren's supporters). His most controversial ideas, when given more and more media attention, proved incredibly unpopular with voters across the spectrum.

 

The D party may be the antithesis to many on here but at the end of the day a majority of its members aren't the bad guys some make them out to be. They turned down Sanders yet again and firmly rejected the most radical ideas he pushed for. If we tried working with them instead of vilifying them we might actually be able to get something meaningful done in this country.

Don't be to sure about that. The Democrat Party has been moving the wrong way for awhile, Zell Miller for example.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?180415-5/a-national-party-more

Both my long-term union parents are dismayed about the Democratic Party's shifting away from the blue-collar worker and the shift away from the traditional work ethic of the U.S. A common saying of my parents is "There are to many people on disability who can work!" There is a demographic shifting in the positive core values of morality, marriage, and work ethic from Democrat to Republican. This gap is getting wider in favor of the GOP.

From CNN of all places Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large; October 24, 2019, Half of Americans think the Democratic Party has moved too far left.

 

 

Saying half of Americans think the D party has moved too far left isn't really saying much. That half of America comprises the Rs, independents who lean R, and likely independents who don't have anything nice to say about the Rs, either.

 

The poll he's referencing can be looked at here, btw.

 

While it's an older poll there's some interesting results in it. So while 47% of Americans thought the Ds had moved too far Left 37% thought the Rs had moved too far Right. Oddly enough, the Ds had a higher approval rating compared to the Rs.

 

I agree the Ds have made a blunder in their shift away from their core towards the plight of minority groups. That should have been a lesson learned from '16 (and wasn't). Still, as many issues the Ds have the Rs have as many and more. Participation in political parties has dropped over the years and more often than not your average American despises both sides (again, look at that poll above... Pelosi was getting approval ratings similar to Trump).

 

Other than the CNN poll statement,you have not stated the major topic; the pluses and minuses of the Democrats and Republicans in response to my statement.

 

I'm not really sure what you mean? Are you talking about your claim that too many Americans are unhappy with where the Ds are heading? As I mentioned is that really relevant if more Americans still prefer the Ds over the Rs as that poll highlights?

 

Getting back to my original point, the reality is we'll never see a situation where the Rs are in firm control across the board (and frankly, from their track record... do we even want that?). If anything meaningful is going to get done it's going to require cooperation across the spectrum. That's just reality... just as it's always been.

[Jeff]

 

Joe Biden won because of the black vote. For some reason, Bernie didnt appeal to the black community. Joe Bidens long term support of the community and his loyal service to the only black president counted.

 

This was something I recall getting a lot of attention back in '16. The best explanation I remember seeing was that it's an intertwining of the Black community's view of the importance of personal connections to those who supported the community and not abandoning them. Thus Hillary being the wife of Clinton (apparently very popular in the Black community) and Biden being the VP to Obama trumps all the effort Sanders made during the civil rights movement.

 

When Bernie Bros pointed out how Bernie did more decades ago then Clinton and Obama did recently that only seemed to harden the resolve of many Black voters to stick with Hillary and Biden (similar to how you see some conservatives on here, when their hypocrisy on a Conservative position is pointed out, dig in to their original stance rather than change their mind).

 

 

The African American community will do whatever their "reverends" and bishops" tell them to do once they see who hands out the most "walking around money".

[Skywalkre]

 

 

Joe Biden won because of the black vote. For some reason, Bernie didnt appeal to the black community. Joe Bidens long term support of the community and his loyal service to the only black president counted.

 

This was something I recall getting a lot of attention back in '16. The best explanation I remember seeing was that it's an intertwining of the Black community's view of the importance of personal connections to those who supported the community and not abandoning them. Thus Hillary being the wife of Clinton (apparently very popular in the Black community) and Biden being the VP to Obama trumps all the effort Sanders made during the civil rights movement.

 

When Bernie Bros pointed out how Bernie did more decades ago then Clinton and Obama did recently that only seemed to harden the resolve of many Black voters to stick with Hillary and Biden (similar to how you see some conservatives on here, when their hypocrisy on a Conservative position is pointed out, dig in to their original stance rather than change their mind).

 

 

The African American community will do whatever their "reverends" and bishops" tell them to do once they see who hands out the most "walking around money".

 

 

If that were the case then why didn't they support Sanders with everything he was promising he'd make 'free'? He was certainly offering more then Hillary or Biden.

[Tim the Tank Nut]

that particular network is an old school thing...

[Jeff]

 

 

 

Joe Biden won because of the black vote. For some reason, Bernie didnt appeal to the black community. Joe Bidens long term support of the community and his loyal service to the only black president counted.

 

This was something I recall getting a lot of attention back in '16. The best explanation I remember seeing was that it's an intertwining of the Black community's view of the importance of personal connections to those who supported the community and not abandoning them. Thus Hillary being the wife of Clinton (apparently very popular in the Black community) and Biden being the VP to Obama trumps all the effort Sanders made during the civil rights movement.

 

When Bernie Bros pointed out how Bernie did more decades ago then Clinton and Obama did recently that only seemed to harden the resolve of many Black voters to stick with Hillary and Biden (similar to how you see some conservatives on here, when their hypocrisy on a Conservative position is pointed out, dig in to their original stance rather than change their mind).

 

 

The African American community will do whatever their "reverends" and bishops" tell them to do once they see who hands out the most "walking around money".

 

 

If that were the case then why didn't they support Sanders with everything he was promising he'd make 'free'? He was certainly offering more then Hillary or Biden.

 

 

The black church mafia doesn't get power from free things, they get it from cash and access to power. White kids getting free tuition does nothing for them.

 

From Slate no less.

"Walking around money"

[DKTanker]

Bernie Sanders was never ever going to get the black vote for one incontrovertible reason, he's a Jew.

[Mikel2]

There is a lot of very vocal antisemitism coming from the Black community. They largely get a pass, since only whites can be racist, but I get the impression that is a relatively new phenomena. When did this streak of black antisemitism begin?

[DKTanker]

There is a lot of very vocal antisemitism coming from the Black community. They largely get a pass, since only whites can be racist, but I get the impression that is a relatively new phenomena. When did this streak of black antisemitism begin?

Not a new phenomena, an underlying theme in the African American community for the last few hundred years. Jews sold Africans into slavery, dontchya know.

Edited April 17, 2020 by DKTanker

[Mikel2]

 

There is a lot of very vocal antisemitism coming from the Black community. They largely get a pass, since only whites can be racist, but I get the impression that is a relatively new phenomena. When did this streak of black antisemitism begin?

New phenomena as in at least 60 years old.

 

 

I wonder if it came with the shift from the left with respect to (the very socialist) Israel following the 1967 war?

Edited April 17, 2020 by Mikel2

[DKTanker]

 

 

There is a lot of very vocal antisemitism coming from the Black community. They largely get a pass, since only whites can be racist, but I get the impression that is a relatively new phenomena. When did this streak of black antisemitism begin?

New phenomena as in at least 60 years old.

 

 

I wonder if it came with the shift from the left with respect to (the very socialist) Israel following the 1967 war?

 

It has come out of the closet, so to speak, with the rise of the Nation of Islam in the 1950s. MLK was a righteous friend of Israel and the Jews, those that followed in his footsteps such as Al Sharpton and especially Jessie Jackson, are staunch anti-semites.

[EchoFiveMike]

Urban blacks don't like the urban Jews they generally encounter; landlords, pawn brokers, liquor store owners, lawyers as well as the ultraorthodox in places like NYC. Rural blacks don't GAS, they don't encounter Jews much, if at all. MLK liked the Jews that were basically running the civil rights movement. Al and Jesse hate the fact that their time is done, they have served their purpose and have been cast aside, no longer useful to the subversive movement. S/F....Ken M

[Ivanhoe]

My theory is it started during the New Deal. FDR and all that.

[JWB]

[NickM]

Urban blacks don't like the urban Jews they generally encounter; landlords, pawn brokers, liquor store owners, lawyers as well as the ultraorthodox in places like NYC. Rural blacks don't GAS, they don't encounter Jews much, if at all. MLK liked the Jews that were basically running the civil rights movement. Al and Jesse hate the fact that their time is done, they have served their purpose and have been cast aside, no longer useful to the subversive movement. S/F....Ken M

Don't forget the condescending 'bleeding heart liberal Civil Rights Activists' who pretend they 'care' about Urban blacks but actually think they're such simpletons they need to be led for their own good--and I'm sure said urban blacks can comprehend the contempt.