|
|
| Subtalk politics: at a glance (101800) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|
|
|
| (101806) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Feb 27 09:55:28 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Interestimg graph. By the way, I support gun control and the death penalty for murderers and traitors. |
|
|
| (101810) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Mon Feb 27 10:00:01 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Your formatting's very hard to follow.Anyway, here are my positions: Stem cell - pro Gun control - pro, within limits Abortion choice - pro Federal healthcare - anti, though it's possible I could be convinced otherwise Port sale - pro, so long as there's careful monitoring Social Security reform - so pro, I'm practically off the charts Morning after - pro Gay marriage - anti Public smoking ban - don't care Patriot Act - pro, within limits Creation in schools - anti Motorcycle helmets - don't care My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
|
| (101817) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 10:09:25 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Anyway, here are my positions:Stem cell - pro Gun control - ANTI Abortion choice - pro Federal healthcare - PRO -LOCK WALL STREET OUT. Port sale - ANTI Social Security reform - so ANTI I'm practically off the charts -LOCK WALL STREET OUT. Morning after - pro Gay marriage - Don't care Public smoking ban - don't care Patriot Act - ANTI Creation in schools - anti Motorcycle helmets - don't care |
|
|
| (101821) | |
Re: SubCHAT politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 10:27:14 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. You're calling it Subtalk again. |
|
|
| (101824) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Kirschner on Mon Feb 27 10:38:40 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. For what it's worth:Stem cell - For it Gun control - For it--but not for outright bans of all guns. But if cop-killer bullets and semi-automatic weapons are needed for hunting... Abortion choice - For it Federal healthcare - Very much for it. An idea whose time has come Port sale - No F*&%ing way! Social Security "reform" - Against this deliberate attempt to kill social security Morning after - for it Gay marriage - for it Public smoking ban - for it Patriot Act - against Creationism in schools - has no place being passed off as "science". Perfectly OK as theology Motorcycle helmets - for them |
|
|
| (101853) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:33:18 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Ahh, and what about RickyRab? Anyway, here are my positions: Stem cell research - pro Gun control - pro, within limits Abortion choice - kinda pro/ don't particularly care (it's more of a women's issue) Federal healthcare - not sure. Depends on how well managed the result is. Could be a good idea if Congress et al can get their act together. Port sale - anti. I don't want some Arab sheik running our ports. I'm fine with British folks or Canucks or even Japanese running our ports, though. Social Security reform - pro/don't really care, so long as Social Security is put on an even keel. Morning after - pro Gay marriage - pro Public smoking ban - pro. Smoke in restaurants sucks. Patriot Act - pro, within limits (don't go around violating privacy, and don't engage in "mission creep"). Creation in schools - anti Motorcycle helmets - don't care |
|
|
| (101855) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:36:13 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:33:18 2006. Ahem. Change my "abortion choice" stance to "pro". Less inconsistent w/ my position on gay marriage. |
|
|
| (101856) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 11:36:24 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:33:18 2006. Abortion choice - kinda pro/ don't particularly care (it's more of a women's issue)...said the man with no sex life. |
|
|
| (101857) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:36:29 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:33:18 2006. Ahem. Change my "abortion choice" stance to "pro". Less inconsistent w/ my position on gay marriage. |
|
|
| (101858) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 11:38:03 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 11:36:24 2006. reconsideration |
|
|
| (101861) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 11:39:08 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 11:36:24 2006. ***T*R*U*T*H*** |
|
|
| (101868) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 11:57:03 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Stem cell - ForGun control - For Abortion choice - For Federal healthcare - Against Port sale - For Social Security "reform" - For Morning after - For Gay marriage - Strongly against Public smoking ban - For Patriot Act - For Creationism in schools - Don't care |
|
|
| (101871) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:00:41 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 11:57:03 2006. Why for the port sale? |
|
|
| (101875) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:03:02 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 11:39:08 2006. ...said the guy who doesn't know how to mind his own business. |
|
|
| (101876) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:03:04 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:00:41 2006. Why not?The company has a fine record and UAE is in my opinion, a model. |
|
|
| (101877) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:04:28 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:03:02 2006. NBS, your comebacks are not very strong... when I can't think of a witty comeback, I just stay quiet... it works better that way. |
|
|
| (101878) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:06:44 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:04:28 2006. Why should I issue strong comebacks? I'm trying to call it like it is, not overdo it, like some morons in here.... maybe I'll jack it up and call BIE a pervert... |
|
|
| (101879) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:07:21 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:06:44 2006. ok, BIE. You pervert. Me Tarzan. Arrrooga. |
|
|
| (101880) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:08:44 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:03:04 2006. And a bunch of Arabs who want to wipe their tuchus with NYC's clock. |
|
|
| (101881) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Steve on Mon Feb 27 12:10:29 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:03:04 2006. Seems that when I hear that a company has a "fine record", I later on hear that that same company has a "record fine". |
|
|
| (101888) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:18:04 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:07:21 2006. I rest my case. Larry, BAN this ASSHOLE. |
|
|
| (101889) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:19:03 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:18:04 2006. Freedom of speech, BIE.Unless you want to Federalize Subtalk, too? |
|
|
| (101890) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:19:57 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:08:44 2006. ***T*R*U*T*H*** The uae was one of only TWO countries to recognize the taliban/al qaida government of Afghanistan. |
|
|
| (101891) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:21:28 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:19:57 2006. I see that people are too afraid to respond to the post I made yesterday re: why racism is still very much alive and why it won't go away anytime soon. |
|
|
| (101892) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:23:11 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Steve on Mon Feb 27 12:10:29 2006. ***T*R*U*T*H***/***H*O*W*L*I*N*G*** |
|
|
| (101893) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:24:09 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:19:03 2006. No, the government has enough problems. |
|
|
| (101894) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 12:24:14 2006, in response to Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 09:45:15 2006. Stem cell - For it, but don't believe it is the panacea that the pro abortion crowd makes it out to be.Gun control - For it, in that I believe gun control laws exist. Against expansion of gun control laws in most cases, since they're generally just political preening. Howzabout we just dedicate some resources towards enforcing the laws on the books today and see what happens? Abortion choice - For, but very weakly. Federal healthcare - Against. Port sale - No opinion, other than general disgust for those who take a position based on a stated or unstated opinion that no Muslim can be trusted. Social Security "reform" - For. I don't see how anyone but an ostrich could be against some type of reform (doesn't mean you have to agree with the administrations proposal, but the numbers don't lie...) Morning after - Weakly against -- kinda sorta takes personal responsibility to an all-time low. Gay marriage - For, as long as it comes with the same limitations (i.e. communal property, divorce) as "traditional marriage". Strongly against "civil unions", where only the benefits but none of the "negatives" are part of the deal. Public smoking ban - For, weakly and selfishly. I recognize that being for this ban is inconsistent with the rest of my politics Patriot Act - For, generally. Concerned about over-zealous interpretation. Creationism in schools - Sure, you can teach that in school. Sunday school. |
|
|
| (101896) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:28:00 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:19:03 2006. This is the post I responded to,BTW"ok, BIE. You pervert. Me Tarzan. Arrrooga. Go back in your hole, Alex. |
|
|
| (101897) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:28:18 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:24:09 2006. I rest my case. Larry, BIE AND AEM7AC GOADED ME INTO THIS NONSENSE. TELL THEM TO CUT IT OUT. |
|
|
| (101900) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:30:53 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:28:00 2006. And I was responding to AEM's taunt:NBS, your comebacks are not very strong... when I can't think of a witty comeback, I just stay quiet... it works better that way. |
|
|
| (101901) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:31:28 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:28:00 2006. Go back in your hole.Oh shit, BIE is pissed at me. OK, I will duly return to my hole. |
|
|
| (101902) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 27 12:36:31 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:28:18 2006. Are you on crack or something? |
|
|
| (101905) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glanceDING,DING,DING!!! |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:39:25 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 27 12:36:31 2006. Teh WINNER!!! |
|
|
| (101906) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a REEF |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:40:22 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 27 12:36:31 2006. This is getting ugly. Reef, Larry, Reef. |
|
|
| (101907) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glanceBZZZZZZZ |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:41:34 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glanceDING,DING,DING!!!, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:39:25 2006. LOSER!!!!! (And you're being a Moron, so 12-9ys and b7foryu0) |
|
|
| (101908) | |
Re: Subchat politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:42:50 2006, in response to Re: Subchat politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:31:28 2006. Oh, come on. Stand up to the Man! (i.e. BIE) |
|
|
| (101909) | |
Re: Subwhine politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:44:48 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:21:28 2006. Well, at least BIE agrees on something with meAnd, no, why should we discuss anti-Arab bigotry? let's stop whining about them when they stop whining about us. |
|
|
| (101910) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:45:22 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:23:11 2006. TRUTH from me as well. |
|
|
| (101911) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:47:26 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:03:04 2006. The UAE is a model? Does that mean that you're going to start flying planes into American skyscrapers . . . ? |
|
|
| (101912) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:48:31 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:03:04 2006. That's not an answer. By extension, why would you be for any US company being bought by a company from overseas? |
|
|
| (101913) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:48:52 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:47:26 2006. Does that mean that you're going to start flying planes into American skyscrapers . . . ?I wouldn't put it past Harry. He has a lot of hate. He even told me so. |
|
|
| (101914) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:49:46 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:47:26 2006. If the UAE were a model, we'd be repaying the favor by flying planes into the Burj Dubai and the Burj al Arab, not American skyscrapers.Unfortunately for those camelherds, the UAE isn't a model for much of anything, except for free speech in the Arab world. |
|
|
| (101915) | |
Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance) |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Kirschner on Mon Feb 27 12:50:14 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 12:24:14 2006. Social Security "reform" - For. I don't see how anyone but an ostrich could be against some type of reform (doesn't mean you have to agree with the administrations proposal, but the numbers don't lie...)Fair enough, but the "solutions" offered by the administrations are not solutions at all, but prescriptions for much, much more debt. Even if this were overcome, it replaces the current system with something much more shaky than what we have now. The basic problem is that we're approaching the great uh-oh (isn't that cute?) in 2011, the year the first baby boomers are set to retire. At some point, there will be more coming out of the system than going into it. There are many possible solutions, most of which are fairly simple: *Raise retirement age to 70: Sucks a little for younger folks like me, but remember that our life expecancy is higher than that for earlier generations *Raise the cap on payroll deductions. Currently noone pays more than approx $89,000/year, no matter how much they make. This is not flat--it's deeply regressive. This means that someone making $400,000 per year is paying the same exact dollar ammount as someone making $4 billion. This is an absurd giveaway to the rich. I don't see why there has to be a cap to begin with. *Demand the social security trust fund get back what is owed to it. The general federal budget has owed it untold ammounts since the Vietnam era, when it borowed from the fund to mask the costs of the war. |
|
|
| (101916) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:51:49 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 27 12:47:26 2006. No, schmuck.Their government is a model for other arab countries in my opinion. I didn't say the morons from that country who participated in those attacks are a model. Don't twist words. |
|
|
| (101917) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:52:09 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by aem7ac on Mon Feb 27 12:48:52 2006. Love to see that building be set ablaze! |
|
|
| (101918) | |
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Feb 27 12:54:40 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Brooklyn IND on Mon Feb 27 12:51:49 2006. As far as freedom of media and some freedom of capital goes, yeah; as far as terrorism goes, no. |
|
|
| (101919) | |
Re: Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance) |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Mon Feb 27 12:55:05 2006, in response to Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance), posted by Andrew Kirschner on Mon Feb 27 12:50:14 2006. Retroactively repeal the billionaires' tax cuts which were funded by taking President Clinton's "Social Security Surplus" and giving it away to the bloodsuckers. |
|
|
| (101920) | |
Re: Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance) |
|
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Mon Feb 27 12:57:51 2006, in response to Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance), posted by Andrew Kirschner on Mon Feb 27 12:50:14 2006. Raise retirement age to 70: Sucks a little for younger folks like me, but remember that our life expecancy is higher than that for earlier generationsIt'll be an extremely hard sell because, as I've mentioned before, we're going in the opposite way. People are retiring at younger and younger ages notwithstanding increased life expectancy and Social Security's woes. You might say that 55 is becoming the new 65, in other words the standard retirement age. Should present trends continue I wouldn't be altogether surprised to see retirement at 50 becoming commonplace. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
|
| (101925) | |
Re: Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance) |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Mon Feb 27 13:07:04 2006, in response to Social Security Reform (Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance), posted by Andrew Kirschner on Mon Feb 27 12:50:14 2006. *Raise retirement age to 70: Sucks a little for younger folks like me, but remember that our life expecancy is higher than that for earlier generationsA very good place to start. But not enough. *Raise the cap on payroll deductions. Currently noone pays more than approx $89,000/year, no matter how much they make. This is not flat--it's deeply regressive. This means that someone making $400,000 per year is paying the same exact dollar ammount as someone making $4 billion. This is an absurd giveaway to the rich. I don't see why there has to be a cap to begin with. Contributions are indeed limited, but it should be pointed out that benefits are similarly capped. The person making $4M per year doesn't get $4M per year from SSI when they retire. They get the same as someone who made $89K per year. The issue here is whether or not SSI is "insurance" (as it was originally intended) or a welfare tax. *Demand the social security trust fund get back what is owed to it. The general federal budget has owed it untold ammounts since the Vietnam era, when it borowed from the fund to mask the costs of the war. For what purpose? So that the government could borrow more -- at increasing interest rates -- to meet current expenses? The "lockbox" is one of the most idiotic economic proposals in history. It's the equivalent of keeping your life savings stuffed in your mattress. On the other hand, it is fair to require the government to account for the future liabilities of the SSI program -- which they don't do today. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|