Are you Liberal or Conservative or somewhere in between?

[Mytical]

Honestly right now, I wish I could move to England. Has more to do with a certain special somebody who is there, but meh

[mikoyan29]

What's worse is being out here with the rest of the world as we watch in horror while you treat some of them as viable political candidates. >.>

But again, damn foreigners, etc.

The debt ceiling fiasco was a prime example. That could have been catastrophic to the global economy. But American politicans dicked around like children, while the rest of the world watched in horror. You know there were more than a few angry phone calls to the White House from overseas during it. But nobody cares because it seems like the opinion of non-Americans can't penetrate the forcefield of American Exceptionalism(tm).

The Debt Ceiling Debate pissed me off the most. Despite what just about everyone said, the REpublicans pretty much said, "We don't believe it". I guess they were taking a page from the Creationism playbook...We don't care how much evidence you can pull saying this is bad, we're not going to believe it. AS if that's not bad enough, the Air Traffic thing followed on its coattails.

And quite frankly things like blowjobs, Bush's service records, Kerry's service records, Obama's birth certificate are all bullshit because they distract from the real issues. This country is definately at a crossroads and neither party really gives a shit except for how to manipulate that to remain in power.

[blas87]

Blowjobs did amazing for the economy.

I suggest Obama get someone a sucking, and soon.

[Andara Bledin]

Blowjobs did amazing for the economy.

The government spent $40 million dollars on that shit investigation.

For a little perspective, we spent only $15 million dollars on the 9/11 investigation.

And that doesn't factor in any of the costs for the shit that didn't get done while the republican party scrabbled did they're damnedest to get rid of Clinton. That was a fiasco, but they're really outdoing themselves this administration for outright dickery, waste, and tribalist bullshit.

^-.-^

[Gravekeeper]

The government spent $40 million dollars on that shit investigation.

For a little perspective, we spent only $15 million dollars on the 9/11 investigation.

....Wait, seriously? Argh. ><

[Andara Bledin]

....Wait, seriously? Argh. ><

The opposition at the time spent nearly $80 million going after the Clinton administration, nearly $50 million being used for the combined Whitewater/Lewinsky debacle.

And, it is worth noting that these are "independent counsel" figures. Due to the sheer amount of wasteful overlap involved in the 9/11 investigation, the actual total is likely closer to $30 million, but we still spent more to try to prove a charismatic guy with a shit-ton of power managed to receive a blowjob than we did on an event where thousands of people lost their lives.

Even worse than the sheer waste are the people who support the ones that threw all of the time, effort, and resource away on bullshit and continue to defend their actions. >_<

^-.-^

[Panacea]

The debt ceiling fiasco was a prime example. That could have been catastrophic to the global economy.

It has been catastrophic to the global economy; it weakened an already weak recovery. We kicked the can down the road; when the super committee fails to agree on how to fix the deficit, then automatic cuts will take effect and we'll be right back in recession. Europe is already teetering on the brink; another economic disaster from America will be all it needs to push it over the edge.

And that doesn't factor in any of the costs for the shit that didn't get done while the republican party scrabbled did they're damnedest to get rid of Clinton. That was a fiasco, but they're really outdoing themselves this administration for outright dickery, waste, and tribalist bullshit.

^-.-^

The only thing Repubs learned from that fiasco was not to waste that kind of money again going after a charismatic Democratic President . . . because it doesn't work.

The opposition at the time spent nearly $80 million going after the Clinton administration, nearly $50 million being used for the combined Whitewater/Lewinsky debacle.

And, it is worth noting that these are "independent counsel" figures. Due to the sheer amount of wasteful overlap involved in the 9/11 investigation, the actual total is likely closer to $30 million, but we still spent more to try to prove a charismatic guy with a shit-ton of power managed to receive a blowjob than we did on an event where thousands of people lost their lives.

Even worse than the sheer waste are the people who support the ones that threw all of the time, effort, and resource away on bullshit and continue to defend their actions. >_<

^-.-^

Yeah, our priorities are quite messed up. If the Republicans put the same energy into actually legislating that they put into trying to defeat Obama, then they might actually have accomplished something.

I really don't think Republicans want things to get better. They like the crisis after crisis because they can just point fingers at the Dems and complain, and not actually have to act and do something.

[Andara Bledin]

I really don't think Republicans want things to get better. They like the crisis after crisis because they can just point fingers at the Dems and complain, and not actually have to act and do something.

They don't. Not on his watch. Not of they can't claim absolute and unshared credit for whatever it is that makes things better.

They would much rather set fire to the sinking ship and point fingers and blame the captain than grab a bucket and help with the bailing.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

Blowjobs did amazing for the economy.

I suggest Obama get someone a sucking, and soon.

They make me happy. And they make every other guy I know happy. Which leads me to a theory that if every guy got them once a day or even once a week, government and everyone would be calmer and more peaceful.

[Rapscallion]

Anyway, I have to ask, what sorts of policies might a Canadian liberal support? What about a British liberal, or a liberal in any other country?

I put a few in the post after yours. Awaiting comment.

Rapscallion

[guywithashovel]

Of course, the clarion cry will erupt as it always does that this is going to cost jobs and everyone's going to see increased prices and the US will become less competitive. Meh - Yurp's been doing the above for some time and we're not doing badly - if it affects everyone equally then it's no burden. Our citizens are generally speaking better off in terms of benefits, though again there is variance from country to country. I fully expect complaints about how this is socialist and therefore evil to come forth, but what's wrong with making sure that your citizens are fit and healthy? What's wrong with the benefit of time off from work?

Why is it that every time I look at the US, I see people proclaiming with one mouth 'we the people' and with another mouth saying that the citizens there shouldn't have similar rights and freedoms? Oh, you've got rights - rights to starve or go into crippling debt if you can't afford treatment. "We the people who can afford" is a better way of putting it. "My fellow americans who aren't inconveniently ill" is another.

The truly scary thing? There are people who would benefit from the adoption of the ideas above or similar who would benefit from their enaction, but would vote against it with all their heart and passion. Why? I can't say for sure, but the old spectre of communism and socialism reared by McCarthy still lingers in the US psyche, and the US is one of the most xenophobic places in the world. Don't want those funny foreign ideas coming in.

Rapscallion

I saw this post a while ago. I just couldn't think of much to say at the time.

From my experience, people here in the states who support the ideas you described are usually called "very liberal" or even "socialist." The word "frightening" or "nutcase" gets used in regards to such people, too.

Back when Obama was running for office and talking about health care reform, I heard it said a few times that a national health care program would cause unemployment to rise and stay elevated because having private health insurance through employers is motivation to look for a job.

I have, however, heard the recent problems in Europe blamed on social policies like the ones you described. I'm talking about all the debt defaults and EU bailouts.

Overall, the reactions to policies like national health care seem to fit into at least one of a few categories.

1. It'll make people lazy and not want to look for a job. (I hope the people who say this don't take advantage of the liberal social policies that already exist and benefit them, like Social Security, Medicare, unemployment benefits, farm subsidies, etc.)

2. People who support such policies "just want the government to take care of them."

3. Such policies are tyranny because they go against the liberty that our Founding Fathers died for. (Maybe I just didn't notice it before, but these "Founding Fathers" started to be lionized a great deal after Obama took office.)

[Rapscallion]

Interesting thought occurs. Socialised (or similar) health care means people live longer into retirement, leaving less money for those in power now.

Number two on the objections you report on is interesting - what else is the government for? Arranging an army is supposed to be to defend the citizens, taking care of them from enemies foreign and domestic. Are they saying they don't want to government to take care of them when they're old and infirm? Are they saying that they want huge debt owed by them to vast medical corporations for life-saving treatment?

That baffles me.

As to the recent problems in Yurp, I don't know enough about them to make decisive commentary about what went where. Greece was interesting in that the government wanted EU assistance in the form of a bailout, yet to get it they needed to perform some austerity measures. The people rioted as a result of the jam being taken away. Still doing it from what I understand.

I've just reread what you said - people were saying that people wouldn't go for work if they got free medical care? They were serious? Truthfully, it's something that would cause a shift in the economy, but effectively the benefit cost of the medical insurance would be converted into a tax on the employment of an individual if it goes down the route of the UK system. I pay a relatively minor chunk of my income - and I usually only look at the net value so I don't notice it - and it covers me if I am ill or unemployed, and it goes towards paying for my pension.

Actually, either people over there know their fellow citizens, or the xenophobia often on display has turned inwards.

Rapscallion

[Gravekeeper]

I have, however, heard the recent problems in Europe blamed on social policies like the ones you described. I'm talking about all the debt defaults and EU bailouts.

They have nothing to do with social policies. The epicenter over there is Greece, whose government spent 9 years lying about their economic conditions with the help of Goldmann Sachs. So they could keep spending.

It rippled out from there, and banking dickery is at the centre of a lot of the problems. Much like the US.

Conversely, the socialist gay marriage free health care commie liberal wasteland that is Canada weathered the intial economic bomb better than any other country in the world. On the back of our strict bank regulations that prevent dickery.

1. It'll make people lazy and not want to look for a job.

This is an element of the "Fuck you, I got mine" mantra that seems to be rather prevalent in the US. It seems like a combination of the upper tier going "Fuck you, I got millions" and the lower tier going "Fuck you, I got nothing, but I might have millions one day, and when that day comes you can't have any". Which relies on the total delusion being sold to them by the upper tier that some day they could be just like them.

2. People who support such policies "just want the government to take care of them."

Which is another silly one. I don't think anyone's asking for the government to wipe their ass. But not going bankrupt and losing everything you own if you get injured or sick would be nice. -.-

3. Such policies are tyranny because they go against the liberty that our Founding Fathers died for. (Maybe I just didn't notice it before, but these "Founding Fathers" started to be lionized a great deal after Obama took office.)

I've found the more someone lionizes the Founding Fathers, the less they tend to know about them. Its bad enough anyone buys into the Christian Nation bullshit. As I recall, many of them were Deists. Franklin was a filthy scientist, Washington was all about religious tolerence and freedom, Jefferson loathed clergy and the Catholic Church especially and Madison was so private about his faith no one even knows what it is.

That leaves Adams, Hamilton and Jay. Adams was Unitarian, but rejected orthodox Christian dogma and would not gel remotely with the modern American Christian. Hamilton was an evangelical to begin with, but then spent near 20 years making jokes about it and not giving a shit.

That leaves Jay and his quote: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.".

So I assume thats where all of the bullshit started. One quote from one of the Founding Fathers. Except Jay was Protestant. -.-

So 1 out of 7?

[Gravekeeper]

As to the recent problems in Yurp, I don't know enough about them to make decisive commentary about what went where. Greece was interesting in that the government wanted EU assistance in the form of a bailout, yet to get it they needed to perform some austerity measures. The people rioted as a result of the jam being taken away. Still doing it from what I understand.

Yeah, some of the measures were irrational too and done just to meet whatever criteria the EU laid down. But practically all of the austerity measures cut people's pay and benefits ( everyone's, not just government employees ), lowered their pensions and raised income tax and sales tax. Then raised the taxes on tobacco and booze by 10% for when they went to drown their sorrows over it.

That'd get you a riot in any country me thinks.

[Andara Bledin]

Actually, either people over there know their fellow citizens, or the xenophobia often on display has turned inwards.

There is a toxic "us vs them" mentality slowly eating away at this country, fomented by those with the power with the purpose of keeping those without the power divided and distracted so that the ones who aren't fighting just to survive don't realize that they could be doing better and if they don't act they will end up doing worse.

There is so much rage against the idea that someone, anyone, might possibly receive something that they did not earn, that they did not deserve, that they are more than willing to let those with genuine need go without just to spite the tiny minority of those who would abuse the system.

^-.-^