The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-11-2012, 10:34 PM   #1251
pricejj
jungle
 
pricejj's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 7,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Well, what if the Dems were able to hold enough of the Senate seats to maintain the current number plus take away maybe five of the Rep seats? Could happen. May be just as likely as your opinion/scenario. Voters are not stupid as some here would have them be. Probably best to wait until you know who is runnng. Think Warren against Brown, for example................
That's basically the situation we have now...and Harry Reid has done absolutely nothing since the Democrats lost the super majority...they can't even pass a freaking budget. Harry Reid is an epic fail on the most grandiose of scales.
pricejj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2012, 11:00 PM   #1252
pricejj
jungle
 
pricejj's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 7,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalBronco View Post
From a fiscal perspective, I'm starting to think that the best result is also the most likely result: Obama being re-elected and the Republicans maintaining control of the House and taking the Senate back as well.

This way the Bush tax cuts will be allowed to expire and there won't be a realistic chance that they'll be revived (veto), while the GOP Congress will force Obama to make necessary concessions in Medicare and Social Security (inflationary formulas, benefit reductions, eligibility age changes etc) for long-term fiscal viability and they'll force him to consolidate rather than expand government programs in general (which is definitely appropriate for this era of austerity). Additionally, the "leaner" approach to the military that's underway in the Administration will be allowed to continue so we can net some savings there (necessary, everyone has to share the pain) , but Republican control of the Congress will make sure the cuts aren't unreasonably deep and that vital intelligence, counter-terrorism and R&D spending is preserved. Both sides check the other's penchant for irresponsibility.
1. The tax rates that have been in effect for the last 12 years won't change. Democrats were too chickensh*t to let them expire when they had a super-majority, and now play the class-warfare game for a measly $50B (if they can lock in 30% tax rate for millionaires)...which I don't see happening.

2. Obama is totally irresponsible, and incabable of leading anyone, let alone the U.S. ($5.5T debt in 4 years??!!!!!!)

3. Military spending, although an issue, would have little justification to be ramped up much in the next 4 years. Democrats and Republicans both are banging the drums on Iran. Obama would have just as much if not more penchant for war in Iran as Romney. If the Republicans had the super-majority, they would avoid an all-out war for fear of repurcussions from the voting public. Obama has shown that he doesn't give a sh*t about public sentiment.

4. A Republican super-majority would get the deficit under control, and reform Medicare, and SS in an efficient way. Paul Ryan can tackle Medicare, SS can be made sustainable easily. Any Democrat control in Congress or the Presidency would prevent that from happening the way it needs to.

5. Obama has increased military spending just as much as any Republican President. Whatever the U.S. military future with Iran, it will happen no matter if Romney, or Obama, is in office.

6. Bottom line: I wouldn't trust Obama with a middle school student council budget.
pricejj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 09:44 AM   #1253
Paladin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,227
Default

And I wouldn't trust a repugnican with a match.

Your criticism of Obama is bogus witout specifics; anyone can make global statements without facts. Remember there are two sides to the story. If the Tepugnicans would compromise in good faith, the year would have been better.....







[This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)
Paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 10:21 AM   #1254
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
Where does the line get drawn? Some people are opposed to immunizations. Should they stop covering those? Some people are opposed to blood transfusions. Stop there, too? How about medicines that are derived from animal testing. Can't offend the people who object to that!

Hey, I've got an idea. Since almost all women use contraception how about giving them the choice rather than their employer? The women who object to it don't have to buy it. But why penalize the large majority who do use it?
Here's another thought. We take the concept of health 'insurance' way too far. Contraception isn't expensive. It's a routine and fairly fixed cost. Why in the world should it be 'insured?'

Insurance is designed to cover risks that are unpredictable and/or catastrophic. Mandating coverage for birth control is like mandating that auto insurers should pay for oil changes.

The real answer is that the government likes to use 'insurance' as a way to enforce their own views on things.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 10:56 AM   #1255
Paladin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,227
Default

Talk to your State Insurance Commissioner. Find out who regulates what.








(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)
Paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 01:41 PM   #1256
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Only someone who thinks trillion dollar deficits are sustainable could think that the compromise on offer makes any difference. You're acting like that shamwow salesman who offers 3 more 'free' shamwows so long as you pay for the 'processing and handling'

But hey, those shamwows are "Free*"

In the end, the cost is born by the person paying for the policy. No matter what gimmickry used to disguise it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 02:08 PM   #1257
Paladin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,227
Default

It was Cheany who said that deficits didn't matter. Bushii believed him. Look what that got us...... Two wars, Part D and free money for the rich. Who could ask for more?






[This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)
Paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2012, 02:16 PM   #1258
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
It was Cheany who said that deficits didn't matter. Bushii believed him. Look what that got us...... Two wars, Part D and free money for the rich. Who could ask for more?






[This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)
Good for him. Now we're racking them up 3x faster.. Probably even more.

And it's mostly because of new spending.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 12:40 AM   #1259
BroncoBuff
***************
 
BroncoBuff's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 25,741

Adopt-a-Bronco:
MALIK+QUANTERUS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
Here's a wiki cli
[I]October - In October 2002, a few days before the U.S. Senate voted on the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, about 75 senators were told in closed session that Iraq had the means of attaking the eastern seaboard of the U.S. with biological or chemical weapons delivered by unmanned aerial vehicles.
This and the Condaleeza Rice "we are absolutely certain" quote about the aluminum tubes, such horrific displays of bumbling ineptitude at the highest levels of the executive, military and intelligence communities, I think I would rather they were lies. Less embarrasing.
BroncoBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:17 AM   #1260
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,227
Default

Posted this in the WRP forum as well:

20% of Republicans are leaning towards voting for Obama.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/20-of-rep...ning-to-obama/
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:43 AM   #1261
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,061

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Do these #'s really mean anything? How do they gauge 20%? Why is it important to know?
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:49 AM   #1262
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
Do these #'s really mean anything? How do they gauge 20%? Why is it important to know?
It's important to know because it harkens back to what a lot of us have been saying: the GOP has gone so far to the right that they are turning off moderate Republicans (see SoCal's comments earlier) to the point to where they'd actually consider voting for Obama. It also indicates a base that is not excited about its choices, and that could have a big impact on voter turnout (this is also evidenced by the low voter turnout during the primaries).
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:51 AM   #1263
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,061

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
It's important to know because it harkens back to what a lot of us have been saying: the GOP has gone so far to the right that they are turning off moderate Republicans (see SoCal's comments earlier) to the point to where they'd actually consider voting for Obama. It also indicates a base that is not excited about its choices, and that could have a big impact on voter turnout (this is also evidenced by the low voter turnout during the primaries).
I just see stuff like this, and think it's marketing*.
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:54 AM   #1264
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
I just see stuff like this, and think it's marketing*.
Keep in mind that the link I posted is from WorldNetDaily, a conservative website.
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 10:07 AM   #1265
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
Keep in mind that the link I posted is from WorldNetDaily, a conservative website.
You can also go back to 2008 and find that when asked, a ton of Hillary voters threatened to vote for McCain. Sour Grapes holds on for awhile.

Then in the general they come home. National polls during primary season are really pretty useless.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 10:14 AM   #1266
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,061

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
Keep in mind that the link I posted is from WorldNetDaily, a conservative website.
Yeah, but that doesn't mean anything. What's their game, why push that information?

http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/storie...ndbackers.html
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 10:45 AM   #1267
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,345
Default

Quote:
“Political language—and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists—is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."
- George Orwell in “Politics and the English Language."
http://www.hoover.org/publications/d...article/104721
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 04:40 PM   #1268
BroncoBuff
***************
 
BroncoBuff's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 25,741

Adopt-a-Bronco:
MALIK+QUANTERUS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
I barely ever heard anything about him. Huntsman popped up outta the blue for me and was gone as quickly as he appeared.
Jon Hunstman, he's no a rightard. Believes in evolution, civil unions, speaks fluent Chinese, supposedly likes progressive heavy metal music. Ambassador to China under Obama (he steped down last Spring to come home and run for president, the WH issued press releases thanking Amb. Hunstman for his "tireless advocacy of the Obama agenda in the far East, was a real team player." )


Here's some Huntsman honesty: He dropped out of the race a couple weeks ago and endorsed fellow-Mormon Mitt Romney, but
Quote:
When asked if he trusts Governor Romney, Huntsman replied, “He has not put forth reason to give us a reason for us to trust him.”

Earlier this month, he told another ABC reporter that Romney is “completely out of touch.”

If Obama is reelected, Huntsman will probably be back strong in 2016. We all better hope he does, because there's a rightard born again whack-job savior for the GOP, John Thune. He's young, good looking, well spoken ... has all of the Gingrich/Santorum world view, and none of the Gingrich/Santorum baggage. Obama is lucky he didn't run this time.
BroncoBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 04:44 PM   #1269
BroncoBuff
***************
 
BroncoBuff's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 25,741

Adopt-a-Bronco:
MALIK+QUANTERUS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
“Political language—and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists—is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."

- George Orwell in “Politics and the English Language."
http://www.hoover.org/publications/d...article/104721
Nonsense. That's merely cynicism run amok.
BroncoBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 07:24 PM   #1270
That One Guy
Producer of Nonsense
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sun and Beachville
Posts: 14,087

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
It's important to know because it harkens back to what a lot of us have been saying: the GOP has gone so far to the right that they are turning off moderate Republicans (see SoCal's comments earlier) to the point to where they'd actually consider voting for Obama. It also indicates a base that is not excited about its choices, and that could have a big impact on voter turnout (this is also evidenced by the low voter turnout during the primaries).
Romney is the presumed candidate at this point. Romney is hardly far right. This premise is silly and makes no sense.
That One Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 09:36 PM   #1271
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
Romney is the presumed candidate at this point. Romney is hardly far right. This premise is silly and makes no sense.
Romney is trying to play the role of far-right ideologue to appeal to the lunatic wingnuts and fend off Santorum and Gingrich (he referred to himself as a "severe conservative" the other day ). Problem for him is that nobody on the right buys the act, and he's turning off moderates/independents in the process. Like I said, no one is excited about him as a candidate.
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 01:30 AM   #1272
Dexter
Pro Bowler
 
Dexter's Avatar
 
Bay Harbor Butcher

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 647

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

I'll just leave this here....

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/ar...r-a-pizza?bn=1



It is kind of what I've been thinking. How can he really relate with the people who struggle in this country?
Dexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 05:10 AM   #1273
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,061

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter View Post
I'll just leave this here....

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/ar...r-a-pizza?bn=1



It is kind of what I've been thinking. How can he really relate with the people who struggle in this country?
Voting for Romney = Shopping @ Mao-Mart
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 05:53 AM   #1274
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,061

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode..._Poor_America/

BBC: With one and a half million American children now homeless, reporter Hilary Andersson meets the school pupils who go hungry in the richest country on Earth. From those living in the storm drains under Las Vegas to the tent cities now springing up around the United States...
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 09:47 AM   #1275
IdahoBronco7
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

?
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Denver Broncos