myrmaad Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 This constant rhetoric over 'them' ( the supposed rich) is laughable, it's a diversionary tactic to distract the base of Obama who want entitlements paid with other peoples money. The concept that 'we' as a nation are going to war is droll, the only 'we' are those that are fighting, the rest of you are bitching about the cost/morality of the thing; they are doing the dying not you. :facepalm: Oh come on. You and I both know all the fuss from the right is from people who predominately collect medicare and social security benefits but don't want to pay taxes "to assist those they deem 'undeserving.'" Before you drag out the old saw about how 'we pre-paid for those benefits", you need to understand that most people will recieve far more benefits in dollars then they ever paid in. Furthermore, in order to fix the Soc sec shortfall all we need to do is raise the payroll tax cap. The Social Security taxation system only taxes a person's “earned” income, i.e., salaries and wages, below a certain amount called the “cap”, which is currently set at $106800, -- (i.e., any income over $106800 isn't taxed). Take a look at this http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2011/09/15-10 And it's not so much about "the rich" but the fact that those at the top get plenty of government handouts, yet they begrudge help going to the bottom where there is no bankrolled lobbying. In fact the tax system we have has indeed been a wealth redistribution but contrary to what assorted wingnuts, spin doctors, and fox mouthpieces proclaim, the funnel has been from the middle to the top. I do have proof and if given a proper thread in which to do it, I would savor elaborating on this. On top of that consider who gets the largest welfare handouts: The Sugar industry and the Oil industry both receive government subsidies and handouts. We have a system that sets up our legislators to have to prostitute themselves for campaign funding and it has bought us a corporate oligarchy while chewing and spitting out the middle class as so much fodder for the machine, and the corporatocracy who owns and spins the media then paints the black man in office as the bogeyman, and the frightened masses buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamujiin Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 This constant rhetoric over 'them' ( the supposed rich) is laughable, it's a diversionary tactic to distract the base of Obama who want entitlements paid with other peoples money. The concept that 'we' as a nation are going to war is droll, the only 'we' are those that are fighting, the rest of you are bitching about the cost/morality of the thing; they are doing the dying not you. :facepalm: Excuse me, how do you not know if "we' 'had/had not" family members that died during "these wars". My freedom of speech, may not apply here, but my freedom of speech applies in my country, i have a right to "complain" if i want to, so do most people in the free world. I would hope personally that people do not judge, by what is written in a forum. Ecxpecially one that is based on everybody's own opinion. Part of "debating" is having a mediator that keeps things on track.In a forum, If there is no immediate mediator, then people are left to use they're best judgment. I may not have the ability to reserve my right here to complain, but i will as it is my duty as a ctitzen of the U.S.A reserve my right to say how i feel about my governement. It is every citizens duty, to question they';re own government, and the job that they are doing.If you asserting that you have lost family in 'these' wars then don't be ambiguous about it. 'We' having been fighting for your right to speak for over 250 years..certainly speak away... but don't make inclusive assertions to a club that you 'may or may not be a member' of' unless you are ( in which case I retract my disdain and apologize), that is simply presumptuous and frankly offensive. I am just going to leave you guessing on that one...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Heres a question, Who in the bloody hell sent soldiers over there (i.e the middle east), I sure as hell didn't. I don't support any form of war to overthrow a rather unwanted (yet legitimate) government. Whoa whoa hold up, legitimate? You’re going to have to explain that. Usually an unwanted government loses its legitimacy, hence…you know elections. Unless of course you’re operating under different assumptions on what makes up a legitimate government... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Everyone has the right and the responsibility to have their opinion on US participation in wars, warmongering generally, you obviously do not have to be a member of the military or have a family member in the military in order to have an opinion since Congress doesn't have to be a member of the military or have a family member in the military before sending our best and brightest to die in war. Edit: He meant someone who was actually voted into office not someone crowned president by a loaded supreme court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Well said, Myr. I believe that those who have served in the military, particularly during wartimes, such as Aurielius who is a decorated Naval fighter pilot (actually known as aviators in that particular branch of the service) who served with honor in Viet Nam, do have a clearer perspective on war than the rest of us. No, I do not believe that means that gives them any more right to an opinion than it give us. But by the same token it might behoove us to listen to them and give them a certain amount of respect and give some credence to what they have to say with respect to war and when and if there is a liklihood of same. I personally abhor the thought of war as most of you know. However, I am pragmatic enough to know that the reality is that there are times when there is no alternative. In the meantime, I am not sure what any of this has to do with Mr. Obama's face, but it has certainly become a fascinating thread... :biggrin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 It gives a better perspective of war sure, but it doesn't mean you should act like the military is a special club and say you shouldn't have opinions on the military. It also doesn't mean you are right when you ignore reality and say that the military is currently protecting our rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted472477User Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Hes obviously a reptilian alien. I for one welcome our reptilian overlords! :D Back on subject, I think it happens because he is just in "I R Serious President. This B Serious Business" mode. I love the guy, but yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginnyfizz Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Well said, Myr. I believe that those who have served in the military, particularly during wartimes, such as Aurielius who is a decorated fighter pilot who served with honor in Viet Nam, do have a clearer perspective on war than the rest of us. No, I do not believe that means that gives them any more right to an opinion than it give us. But by the same token it might behoove us to listen to them and give them a certain amount of respect and give some credence to what they have to say with respect to war and when and if there is a liklihood of same. I personally abhor the thought of war as most of you know. However, I am pragmatic enough to know that the reality is that there are times when there is no alternative. In the meantime, I am not sure what any of this has to do with Mr. Obama's face, but it has certainly become a fascinating thread... :biggrin: Hear, hear, Granny - speaking as someone who has not themself been sent to war but is the grandaughter, niece and cousin of holders of the Military Cross (the first and last two officers and gentlemen)and the Distinguished Flying Cross (the middle officer and gentleman, my uncle, posthumous decoration, funny how there are those who would now brand him a war criminal since he was bombing the wotsit out of the Ruhr when he bought it)I would agree with your post - they do have a unique perspective, although they do not have an exclusive right to an opinion...and I too am not sure what any of this has to do with Obarmy...sorry, I mean Mr President's..face when speaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Don't forget that I served in the US Air Force. I enlisted and did not retire, I did not see active warfare, but I made my pledge not knowing what the future held and would have done my duty and beyond, as I always did. And I'm telling you I don't appreciate the implication that anyone's views are more or less valuable than anyone else's here except by virtue of the words' own merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginnyfizz Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 That is NOT what I said and I do not appreciate being misconstrued. I was agreeing with what Granny said, that is to say that although people who have served have a different perspective and unique insight, and deserve our respect, that no-one, including them has an exclusive right to an opinion, which by implication means that the opinion of everyone here is of equal merit and is allowed to be heard. Sometimes it is the way that things are said that is the problem. I personally don't like the implication that I said something which I most definitely did not say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts