General Political Thread

[Guest Jules]

If you think you've got the right to tell me what to do...well, you've got another think coming.

 

I have read many of your posts on this board, and most of them are monosyllabic snark at best or obnoxious crap at worst. You think you are hilarious, I'm sure, but you only come across as thoughtless, arrogant, entitled, and immature. I have zero respect for you as a human being, so don't think for a moment I'm going to do anything you suggest. Feel free to put me on permanent ignore, as I have told you before. I don't need or want any response from you to anything I post in any thread.

I simply answered your question and you come back with this? Jeez.

 

I'm one of the nicest people I've ever met.

[Guest Jules]

Seriously, though, no respect for me as a human being? I have kids, man.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jules. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jules. View it anyway?

No, I do not.

Carry on, friends, carry on.

[Guest Jules]

you child.

[Atticus]

Better than Palin?

 

[Atticus]

it used to bother me when a person from one side of the political spectrum wholly dismissed everything said by a person holding a specific belief or beliefs on the other side of the spectrum.

 

e.g. when a liberal would basically take the position that he/she couldn't take seriously anything said by someone who is pro-life or a creationist.  

 

But lately I'm finding that it's more and more difficult for me to lend any credence or open-mindedness to someone who opposes gay marriage.

 

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

[bleedorange]

it used to bother me when a person from one side of the political spectrum wholly dismissed everything said by a person holding a specific belief or beliefs on the other side of the spectrum.

 

e.g. when a liberal would basically take the position that he/she couldn't take seriously anything said by someone who is pro-life or a creationist.  

 

But lately I'm finding that it's more and more difficult for me to lend any credence or open-mindedness to someone who opposes gay marriage.

 

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

 

You should probably ask Mr. Heartbreak.

[NoJ]

 

 

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

 

It depends how hormonal I am.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

it used to bother me when a person from one side of the political spectrum wholly dismissed everything said by a person holding a specific belief or beliefs on the other side of the spectrum.

 

e.g. when a liberal would basically take the position that he/she couldn't take seriously anything said by someone who is pro-life or a creationist.  

 

But lately I'm finding that it's more and more difficult for me to lend any credence or open-mindedness to someone who opposes gay marriage.

 

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

 

I honestly try my best to maintain an open mind and listen to specific points and issues. My best friend is a Republican who has probably never voted for a D for any major office in his life. But we have reasoned, calm, rational discussions, and at the end of the day, we can shake hands and walk away. It's never threatened our friendship.

 

I can see, however, why a person would ultimately dismiss everything that comes out of someone's mouth if they simply find that person's personality to be utterly repugnant. Sarah Palin's vapid, folksy, sarcastic persona comes to mind, but there are also people out there whose faces I've never seen whose opinions I would never really embrace on any level just because they are not interested in real dialogue but rather, want to throw bombs, write flippant remarks, and just generally be an annoying pest.

 

That's one of the reasons Reagan was so successful: he threw around some of the most disgusting, race-baiting remarks ("welfare queens," "strapping young bucks," etc.), but because he always had that cheesy grin and the grandfatherly, soothing tone of voice, people thought he was "a real nice guy." In reality, he was kind of a dick, but people somehow missed out on that because his personality seemed so warm.

[KevinG]

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

 

I wish everyone would wear a D or an R on their lapel.  That way I would know who to talk to and who not to talk to.  It is how I vote and a good model on how to live life.  

[NoJ]

 

 

That's one of the reasons Reagan was so successful: he threw around some of the most disgusting, race-baiting remarks ("welfare queens," "strapping young bucks," etc.), but because he always had that cheesy grin and the grandfatherly, soothing tone of voice, people thought he was "a real nice guy." In reality, he was kind of a dick, but people somehow missed out on that because his personality seemed so warm.

Raygun turned me into the pinko that I am today. Thanks Ronnie!

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Raygun turned me into the pinko that I am today. Thanks Ronnie!

[John Smith]

You know it would be a fair point if she supported tax increases, which she does not. The thing about the GOP is they decry the debt and the horrible things it will bring. But the only way they see to solve our debt crisis is to decrease spending, but really on things they don't like. And it should be noted that government spending is way down under Obama and yet the debt is increasing. So if you believe the deficit spending is bad you have to do a mixture of decreasing in spending and revenue increases (aka taxes). But you will never every see Sarah Palin or any GOPer say that. So really it is just talk, the TEA party doesn't care about the debt, they just don't want the government to spend money on things they don't like. So they use the hyperbolic statements of fear.

This is absolutely true but you can't convince them of it. They still think tax cuts pay for themselves, the economy was good and debt/deficit were near $0 till Obama went on a spending spree. They ignore 2001 news stories that discussed the deficits that were going to result from the tax cuts, and prefer to focus on cuts paying for themselves rhetoric. They also love to compare their personal spending habits to a national economy. Drives me crazy how uneducated our population is on economics and how politicians capitalize on the ignorance.

[LouieB]

The fact is that the economy continues to suck because neither the government, nor the private sector is hiring people. While the debt may be up, it is primarily because of two unfunded wars started by Bush and then put on the books by Obama. But actual government spending is way way down. Were there more government employees, both federal, state and local, buoyed by government spending, things might be better. But until the private sector decides to start pumping some dough into the economy in the form of hiring some folks, things are going to suck. I am surprised corporations, having started sucking the older generation dry, hasn't figured out that they need to start giving some money to our kids in the form of jobs so they will have someone to plunder all over again a few decades from now. Kind of short sighted on their part.

 

LouieB

[John Smith]

it used to bother me when a person from one side of the political spectrum wholly dismissed everything said by a person holding a specific belief or beliefs on the other side of the spectrum.

 

e.g. when a liberal would basically take the position that he/she couldn't take seriously anything said by someone who is pro-life or a creationist.

 

But lately I'm finding that it's more and more difficult for me to lend any credence or open-mindedness to someone who opposes gay marriage.

 

are most of you able to keep an open mind and listen to specific points and issues, or do you wholly dismiss things based on the person speaking?

For me it's all how it's presented. For instance the Beck/Palin approach will never work with me. Unfortunately that is to common, and no the left has nothing approaching those two as viewed through the lens of their approach and popularity.

 

When I was going through basic training I was about five years olderand more educated than the average recruit. Because of this yelling I'm my face was not going to work. It took the drills a couple of weeks to figure out that talking to me got much better results. It's just how I am

[Guest Jules]

The fact is that the economy continues to suck because neither the government, nor the private sector is hiring people. While the debt may be up, it is primarily because of two unfunded wars started by Bush and then put on the books by Obama. But actual government spending is way way down. Were there more government employees, both federal, state and local, buoyed by government spending, things might be better. But until the private sector decides to start pumping some dough into the economy in the form of hiring some folks, things are going to suck. I am surprised corporations, having started sucking the older generation dry, hasn't figured out that they need to start giving some money to our kids in the form of jobs so they will have someone to plunder all over again a few decades from now. Kind of short sighted on their part.

 

LouieB

 

So they should just create jobs out of thin air? Companies tend to hire people when they NEED people.

[John Smith]

So they should just create jobs out of thin air? Companies tend to hire people when they NEED people.

The company I work for (fortune 25) has gone on an austerity kick to pump/ pimp share price. We have cut staff and not replaced our natural attrition losses. I can't speak for other areas but my area had lost staff and had an increase in tasks assigned. We are expected to be on call 24-7 if needed. So the work is being created it is just being spread over the current staff. We are probably 1.5 people short in my group of 4. So in my small corner of the world the work is there but no new job has been created.

 

Also it has been said many times that corporate profits equals jobs and that is not at all true. Frequently profits are pumped by cutting jobs. That's what happens when Wall Street dictates how a company is run.

[Guest Jules]

If it's strictly to pump share price then I see the argument there, but I have a problem with blanket statements that since companies are making a profit they should automatically be hiring.  If they did so, they wouldn't be profitable for very long.

[John Smith]

I'm not Making that statement that is what the people who talk about "job creators" were saying for quite a while. I'm of the opinion that you staff for needs.

 

As to the pumping the stock price every pronouncement these days has a blurb about shareholder value. That's all well and good for the long term plans but the short term actions don't last as long as the hits to employee morale. We are still reeling from layoffs 2 years ago.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I mentioned earlier that I have requested that at least one VC member ignore my posts (I believe I did it via messenger on here..it was a while ago). If anyone here would prefer not to read my posts – and, hey, I can imagine there are several – please feel free to ignore me. I really don’t mind at all. In fact, I would respect myself less if everyone liked me.

 

And it’s really not that hard to set Ignore Preferences.

 

First, you go to your name in the upper right hand corner and click on it.

Click My Profile.

Click Edit My Profile.

Under Profile Settings, click Ignore Preferences.

Then, under Add a new user to my list, type in the offending member’s name.

Click Save Changes.

And, voila. You no longer need to read the posts of those who are noxious to you.

 

Of course, sometimes I am an absentminded professor and peruse VC without logging in. And that’s when I see all the garbage I’d rather live without. Nobody's perfect.

[uncool2pillow]

I can't imagine getting so worked up about what someone says on a message board to want to put them on ignore.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I have about five people whose posts consistently annoy me (in multiple forums) that they are on ignore permanently. You're not one of them. Congrats!

[Guest Don Draper]

I have requested that at least one VC member ignore my posts 

Didn't you just tell that other guy that he shouldn't tell you what to do?

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Didn't you just tell that other guy that he shouldn't tell you what to do?

I did indeed. That is why I put my request in the form of a request, and not a command.

Not the first time I have made said request, either. Last time was in a personal message. Now I am making it a public plea.

[Guest Don Draper]

I did indeed. That is why I put my request in the form of a request, and not a command.

 

I suppose I fail to see how "cut the snark" and "put me on ignore" are different, but for you happened to use the word request and happened to hear the comment as a command.

 

And curiously, you've managed to keep the conversation on topic.  

 

I do consider the personality and presentation of the person with whom I'm talking when I take into account their beliefs; I think it's impossible not to.  On the other hand, I do try to take positives from the conversation when I can.  For instance, I absolutely agree that we should decrease government spending in order to decrease the debt: that's just how it works.  I don't agree with the choices the GOP has made regarding what programs and services to cut, and the Democrats obviously don't either, but I don't understand why the Democrats turn around and then proclaim that they oppose tax cuts generally.  So while I generally agree with many of the things the Democrats do, this has always struck me as stubborn and vote-grabby.

 

I think that the Sarah Palin remark did have some veracity to it.  Of course the statement was hyperbole, but I think that it's possible to use the term "slavery" outside of a third-rail context.  If she'd have said 'holocaust' then sure, but she referred to the dictionary definition of slavery, she didn't say, "Our financial situation is like the burden of the cotton-picking slaves of yesteryear."  (To compare: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have made names for themselves using hyperbole to make solid points.)

 

But that's hard to do, to take the good out of a conversation with/have to listen to someone you think is a moron.  My friend's girlfriend misuses words all the time, and sometimes and unknowingly just makes words up ("pendentary" is apparently a word that somehow relates to "pedantic" in her mind).  She sounds like an absolute idiot when she does this, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have something good to say every now and again.