What? It's not her decision.

It was stupid, but it was simply using a personal email account meanwhile Fox News is pretending she was CCing Putin and the Ayatollah.

Nah, it was just Sidney Blumenthal. Oh, and you said:

 

 

 

Please disclose the contents of those emails. Clinton wants them disclosed.

Molehills.

 

Seems to me that disclosing them would be illegal.

 

You don't speak for everyone. Not even the majority.

Do you?

Nah, it was just Sidney Blumenthal. Oh, and you said:

 

 

 

Seems to me that disclosing them would be illegal.

She doesn't get to decide, she's requesting those that are to make that decision.

Do you?

No, but I didn't claim to know the desire of everyone.

On a side note, this is almost like an internet chat room rather than a forum.

 

No, but I didn't claim to know the desire of everyone.

Did he? You can use the word "we" and not mean everyone, or even a majority.

 

He has accomplished leading the conservative fight against lobbyists and special interest groups. Now, what did Sanders, Clinton, and Obama accomplish in the US Senate?

 

How did he accomplish that?  

 

Did he refuse to take money from them?  How did he do this vague thing you speak of?  Other than just say he was.  

 

How did he accomplish that?  

 

Did he refuse to take money from them?  How did he do this vague thing you speak of?  Other than just say he was.  

One of his more famous issues was when he fought McConnell on the Export-Import Bank, which is well known for favoring special interest groups over the interests of the American tax payer. 

Look! Up in the sky!

 

It's a bird...

 

It's a plane...

 

No, it's SuperPAC!

 

One of his more famous issues was when he fought McConnell on the Export-Import Bank, which is well known for favoring special interest groups over the interests of the American tax payer. 

 

 

Is it your contention that Cruz doesn't meet with special interests?  Or take their money?

 

 

You don't speak for everyone. Not even the majority.

 

I'm wondering who does. I've yet to meet a single person, ever.

I'm wondering who does. I've yet to meet a single person, ever.

Bravo. And it would be mighty refreshing if people stopped pretending they did.

Plenty of bad ideas, but we always need new ideas. Some will fail. I don't think Sanders could get anything accomplished, and I don't know that some of his plans have very strong foundations, on the other hand I'd still be willing to try some of them, I'm not afraid of trying something new if the current way isn't working.

Its not just that liberal ideas tend to be short-sighted (and they are), they’re too often aimed at fixing problems that don’t exist. Case in point, all of Sanders’ economic platform is predicated on the “occupy Wall St” outrage over the system of trade and foreign investment. But outsourcing has lifted millions more into the middle class than its eliminated; median Chinese income has more than tripled since 2000 while US incomes have basically flatlined. So, as a conservative, I’m skeptical there’s a problem, and doubly skeptical of any solution designed to “fix” it.

 

I'm not sure how over-taxation will drive away the rich though. Where are they going? Even if they left though, that's a short term pain for a long term gain. The void they left will someday be filled by someone who is willing to work within a framework that is better for the country.

Where do you think their wealth is, land? If those folks leave, the wealth follows them. There is no void.

Short. Sighted.

 

http://d352pwrn2herc5.cloudfront.net/cdn/farfuture/KuXyxOJu65Sj1qWc5Jr_GIrXGIhSygqeMChd-4mJBTE/mtime:1453996453/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/All%20Charts_1.pdf

 

Where do you think their wealth is, land? If those folks leave, the wealth follows them. There is no void.

Any (economic or government) system that puts the majority at the mercy of the uber-rich needs to change. If corporations continue to sell goods to Americans we can find ways to tax them.  As for the uber-wealthy individuals - part of the problem is that they hoard wealth and make for a less liquid economy.  I say let them walk. 

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by PseudoSABR

Short. Sighted.

 

http://d352pwrn2herc5.cloudfront.net/cdn/farfuture/KuXyxOJu65Sj1qWc5Jr_GIrXGIhSygqeMChd-4mJBTE/mtime:1453996453/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/All%20Charts_1.pdf

The Tax Foundation is a conservative think tank with a pretty obvious bias.

The Tax Foundation is a conservative think tank with a pretty obvious bias.

Dammit, ok well I wasn't aware. And its such an elegant presentation too.

Any (economic or government) system that puts the majority at the mercy of the uber-rich needs to change. If corporations continue to sell goods to Americans we can find ways to tax them.  As for the uber-wealthy individuals - part of the problem is that they hoard wealth and make for a less liquid economy.  I say let them walk.

I could not have written a more short-sighted opinion if you'd paid me to. Thanks for helping prove my point.

 

I could not have written a more short-sighted opinion if you'd paid me to. Thanks for helping prove my point.

You're kind of insufferable.  I suppose we should just enjoy our cake.  

 

Just as soon as the Chinese get civil rights, unions, freedom of the press, we'll see US wages rise any day now.  Wait for it. Wait for it.

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by PseudoSABR

 

You don't speak for everyone. Not even the majority.

 

And the get somtten dun crowd does?

 

Any (economic or government) system that puts the majority at the mercy of the uber-rich needs to change. If corporations continue to sell goods to Americans we can find ways to tax them.  As for the uber-wealthy individuals - part of the problem is that they hoard wealth and make for a less liquid economy.  I say let them walk. 

 

Hi I'm a member of the tea party.  If your wondering why we exist read this.  We'll raise your taxes and then raise them again for trying to avoid them.  If our taxes drive you out of business we'll fine you.  You owe us money just for existing.  We need to make some new laws so we can see if they work cause we just have to get something done.

 

And this is why Democrats will lose this election.  We already have laws, we've had a country that has functioned for nearly 250 years.  We're sick of new laws and new promises that only create more debt and no real solutions.  When Democrats are ready to repeal some laws let us know until then no laws is far greater of an accomplishment then new laws. 

 

there are less regulations now, than 8 years ago.....just a factual statement.

 

Do you need me to say it over and over again?  He didn't vote in favor of bad legislation for the sake of "getting something done".  WE DON'T  WANT ANY NEW LAWS.  WE DON'T NEED ANY NEW LAWS.

 

so, we don't need laws outlawing gay marriage? Great, we agree on that. How about laws making it illegal for school children to get counseling if they feel suicidal because they are gay in a gay hating state? How about those laws? What about laws restricting what a doctor can/cannot say to a patient, how do you feel about those laws?

 

Democrats want businesses not to pollute, and to treat their employees certain ways. Republicans want laws that try to control individual behavior......which one really hates freedom to be different?

186,000 miles/sec. It's not just a good idea, it's the law.

 

All the rest; pfft.

 

What? It's not her decision.

It was stupid, but it was simply using a personal email account meanwhile Fox News is pretending she was CCing Putin and the Ayatollah.

 

Sorry Nick, it really doesn't matter.  This is a well documented no no in the classified world, one I'd add that would cost a normal person their clearance and quite possibly jail time. 

 

This is a big deal.  I'd further add that secure networks are setup in such a way that this isn't possible without skirting the system. 

 

I really don't appreciate the double standard here, nor do I appreciate the fact that her supporters just want to play it off as nothing. It was something, and it's a slap in the face to those of us who handle sensitive data.

The emails is a big deal. Bengahzi? Uh, compared to what happened under Bush? No, that is not on Clinton at all, unless 9/11 is on Bush....and Iraq is on Bush (well, that one is). Or the huge deficit under Bush (much larger % of the economy than now), well, maybe that one is partly.

 

Actually, if you look at deficits....they are larger as a percent of the economy under the Bush family than under Clinton or Obama, I know, more pesky facts that don't fit the narrative.

 

You're kind of insufferable.  I suppose we should just enjoy our cake.  

 

Just as soon as the Chinese get civil rights, unions, freedom of the press, we'll see US wages rise any day now.  Wait for it. Wait for it.

Sorry for making this personal, I will back off. But, you are downplaying the positive flipside which is skyrocketing wages which have lead to concrete improvements in the standards of living for millions of people. Why doesn't Sanders ever mention that? Because they don't have a free press? Liberals should be elated about that.

 

Another flipside of the trade deficit is that a stronger US dollar leads to cheap imports. We have free trade agreements to thank for that too. The loss of jobs is painful, I agree, and probably temporary. In the interim though everything is cheap.

 

*Another* flipside of the 1% talking point is that the rich pay about half of the income taxes collected by the IRS. Revenues used to pay for medicare and insure low interest home loans, things like that. While the bottom 80% pay only 15%. So the system is already rigged in their favor. But Sanders would raise taxes more and create new social programs (free education, etc). Not to mention the $15 minimum wage which is basically a payroll tax. If you do the math, it works out to well over $.50 cents of every dollar earned going to taxes. People should be more cautious about testing the limits of rationality.

In Seattle, employment is UP since they imposed the new wages......and employers are finding that the employees are more loyal to them.......

Rand Paul is officially out now, too.

 

I could not have written a more short-sighted opinion if you'd paid me to. Thanks for helping prove my point.

But Pseudo has a point. While we can't tax the rich into oblivion - nor should we - we can't let them dictate policy out of fear they'll take their ball and go... Where, exactly? Most of the western world has higher tax rates than the US. It's not as if these people are going to flee to Kazakhstan.