The Politics Thread

[SteveFrame]

I don't remember ever denying that I was a moderate with a slight conservative lean. Back about 10 pages ago I explained and put onto paper my stances and where I stood on things. So that is no problem for me to admit - I admit it happily and feel no shame in it at all.

As to the other I guess I am different than most gays or bisexuals - I am an oddity even though I know a few others. Yes I am a bisexual man living in a relationship with a man but there is more to me than that. I don't wear it on my sleeve and make every decision in my life based on it.

There are principles I stand for that are more important to me than my being gay or bisexual. There are issues that I feel are far more important to the welfare of this country that have nothing to do with who I prefer to screw in my bedroom or whereever we choose to screw at. Those principles I won't sacrifice for anything.

As to your last comment I have to laugh - not at you - but just at the statement. I hope to goodness that you honestly don't believe that if it came down to it that the Democrats would not throw the gays under the bus to win an election. They would do it in a heartbeat. Winning the election is the most important thing to them - gay rights, abortion, whatever the issue is can be damned if it costs them the election. They are politicians. They do it in a heart beat.

If you don't believe so call a psychic and call up the old friend of the Clinton's who killed herself because she so believed in the Clintons that she devoted her life to them. When they began to sacrifice the beliefs she felt they never would she lost hope and killed herself. I forget her name but she was huge part of the movie Primary Colors that was written by a Clinton insider. That woman was a real character from early in their political careers.

Almost every politician will back off on issues, change stances, etc. to win an election. In my almost 50 years of living - almost 32 now as a voter - I haven't seen one politician - both Republican and Democrat - who wouldn't do that. And I have no doubt in my mind that the Democratic party would throw the gays to wolves if standing with them started costing them votes.

As I have said I stand on the outside looking in at both parties. I hear both sides say they won't do this or they won't do that. I see this side say the Democrats are the bad ones and the Dems turn around and say the Repubs are the bad ones. This side says they don't do this and the other side says they don't. While at the same time both sides act just a like.

The right persecutes folks and the left does too. And they both believe they are right in doing so. The right says they are persecuting folks for the good of the country while the left say they persecute folks because they are judgemental and try to take away the rights of others. Persecution is persecution no matter what reason you do it for. It's just like as I stated before - look at what the conservatives did to the Dixie Chicks - they made their lives a living hell. What is the difference in that than what the liberals are now doing to Miss California. Both people exercised their rights to free speech. The Dixie Chicks didn't deserve what happened to them and neither does Miss California. I agree with what a columnist said - if Perez wasn't prepared to deal with the truth of her answer then he shouldn't have asked the question.

I don't agree with her at all but I damn well respect the right of her to believe the way she does. My hope and prayer is that someday she will change her mind, but I am not going to call her names or bad mouth her for her opinion in the mean time. I am not going to act like a three year old and resort to name calling and the like just because I don't agree with her.

Perez again answered what he deems as exclusion with exclusion in return. He doesn't want anyone to deny him anything in life simply because he is gay, but yet he turned around and denied her a chance at the crown simply because he didn't agree with her. What is the difference? There is none the way I see it.

That is just my opinion on the whole thing. I am sorry if it seems to you that I am leaning toward having sympathies with the Republicans. I have tried to point out at times how GD posts things from the conservative side and sees things through those eyes too. I guess I need to do that more. I have even tried to include people like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh who I am sick of and stuff to show how I am fed up with the leaders of both parties. I guess my point on the Republican's is just not getting through. I guess I will start bolding those names and those items so they are seen.

I have no sympathies with either party. I am fed up with the actions of both. At times I think they all act worse than 3 year old children who need to be taken out to the wood shed and given a good thrashing.

I am like UClan I enjoy seeing a good exchange of ideas - not just here - but in politics. But more often of the last few years we get the blame game every time they are togehter. Let's forget who's fault it is and discuss the issues. Children lay blame - adults are supposed to discuss and fix the problems. But not one of them can get in front of a microphone and not immediately start pointing fingers at the other person. I just want to reach through the TV and say get over it and move on. If we want to play the blame game believe me there is enough to go around on both sides. We could be here until next year playing that one.

[GoldenDogs]

Nice dodge, my friend. And you know it isn't worth my time to reconstruct the dialogue and point out the obvious.

Well, Greg... I HAVE heard nice things about you, and... ummm...

When they change the tax laws... Or when they pass a new tobacco tax... Or when they redistribute my wealth and give it to someone else... Or... Shall I go on? When Senator Byrd was Grand Dragon, perhaps?

What about when Mayor Newsom in San Francisco declared marriages would be performed in San Francisco, despite a law suggesting otherwise? You think he did it in liberal 'ol California for the fun of it?

Dude, Dems claimed G.W. was endangering America from the very start of the freakin' War on Terror!!!

I deny your furtive assertion that Democrats have their hands clean when it comes to all of these things. In an election year, Democrats are as good as anyone else in stirring up the politics of hate and fear! It would seem YOU need to research history, my friend...

...but you still rock.

[Roman]

Did you see that link I posted about that Congresswoman who said those vile things about Matt Sheppard?

[UCLAN]

Steve Frame, please do not alter your posts. Speak from your views. I can gather how you feel from what you post. I've gotten it that you don't affiliate with either or any party and that you are an independent thinker. I view you as fiscally conservative but socially moderate. It's not up to you to justify or explain how you feel. It's up to us as the reader to agree or disagree and proceed from there. I enjoy reading you posts. They trigger a lot of thought and lots of times require me to seek out more information.

[Greg's GL]

Steve - Great post. You made some great points and it was an interesting read. Mind you, not that I AGREED with some of it but it was a great post just the same. I did want to say that based on UCLAN's post that I sincerely hope that you didn't take what I posted as a condemnation of your point of view.

Like UCLAN, I wouldn't want you to alter your posts either. I love a good debate and was simply trying to push your buttons a little.

I did not! Please post it again or quote the post you put the link in buddy. I have to check that out.

Now for my good buddy Bri -

Damn. And that's just what my aim was - to waste your time. Guess I fucked it up somehow....

Hmmmm. Some more good arguments presented by a "Rightie". I guess I'm off my game today cuz I'm just sitting here with my mouth open. NOT.

Brian, you make some good arguments so let me get to work buddy -

1. The argument of "redistribution of wealth" rings hollow as has been pointed out many times in this thread. Either the Dems do it to benefit the less fortunate or the Repubs do it to benefit the more fortunate. That's the foundation of our tax laws, my friend. That hasn't changed with the election of President Obama. Furthermore, I can hardly compare tax laws to marginalizing a segment of the US population based solely on whom they [!@#$%^&*]. How can you?

2. Nice jab with Sen. Byrd. I posted something about DixieCrats during the general election. They are no longer part and parcel of the Democratic Party. However, Sen. Helms and Sen. Thurman were mainstays in the Republican party no more than 15 years ago. Can you defend them, my friend?

3. Ya got me with Mayor Newsom. Guess I never thought of him using a positive thing as a wedge issue...Hmmm.

So maybe the Democrats do not have their hands clean after all, but it's still my assertion that they may have some smudges on their fingers, the Republican's hands are completely covered in crapola.

And Brian .... you rock too buddy. Mucha ruca.

[Roman]

I would love for the Republican Party to finally become conservative and move more to the center. But for God's sake, don't listen to Rush Limbaugh.

That's like Malcolm X. getting advice on how to get Black Americans to vote from the KKK.

[GoldenDogs]

All issues are relevant and should be discussed. Why hasn't President Obama addressed the issue you clearly wish to see at the forefront of political debate?

I wouldn't dream of defending them. Why would I? But, Greg, do you really believe there is no bigotry left in the Democratic Party? I'd stake money that there are just as many bigots in the Democratic Party as there are in the Republican Party... Maybe more bigoted Democrats when you consider the hate they throw at middle America...

LOL... Not EVEN. I'll say all hands are equally covered in [!@#$%^&*]. The problem is, the focus always falls on the party in power. And, right now, they have complete control. And there is absolutely no reason in the world why Democratic pet issues shouldn't be dealt with in a manner satisfactory to the Liberal wing of the party. Greg, there is no reason at all why a federal amendment recognizing gay marriage and making possible all rights recognized for straight couples be granted to gay couples. Right?

I think this very point... this very debate... hinges on whether or not President Obama and the Democrats with full power over both houses, can make that happen... If they fail to deliver, Greg, will you stand by President Obama and the Democratic party?

>>HUGS!!!<<

[Greg's GL]

Brian, I can completely understand how you and probably alot of other posters in the forum might have come to the conclusion that I'm a gay marriage advocate. However, in my everyday life, it's not the most important issue to me on the political landscape and actually, if I could marry my lover legally I don't even know if we would do that. Shocking, I know!

The underlying issue regarding gay marriage for me is the line in the constitution (and you're probably tired of me saying this) that states unequivocally that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. "Civil Unions" are not the same and we all know that separate but equal doesn't work. It didn't work for African Americans and it will not work for gay marriage. It never works. Honestly, I would feel that way about any group of people that are marginalized for whatever reason - WITHIN reason. Other than that, I'm more of an environmentalist than a rainbow-flag waving, in your face "we're here and we're queer" kind of guy. Educational issues and other social issues are also right up there in my book of political priorities. Just thought I'd clear that up a little.

That being said, would it be great if the Democratic Congress and President were to recognize same-sex marriages at the federal level? Hell to tha yes, my man. But it ain't gonna happen because it would come with a helluva political price and I don't think they're willing to pay that price. But at least I don't have to listen to Democrats degrade me simply for one small part of the bigger me - YES, like Republicans have done in the past.

In a perfect world, we would have politicians that govern from the center and from the heart. But this ain't a perfect world obviously and our politicians are business people at best and (some) criminals at worst. Republicans and Democrats can fall into either of these molds. They will govern issues based on how far it will extend their political career - I think we can both agree on that. Frankly, you're implication that all I care about is gay marriage is a little insulting, my friend. You, of all people, should know I'm more well-rounded politically than that. I'm curious though - how do you feel about same sex marriage? You said that Republicans better align with your "values", so ????

On to another issue, President Obama is keeping another campaign promise in regards to companies shipping jobs overseas. Good for him, I say!

Obama tax dodge plan

[GoldenDogs]

Why, you needn't be insulted, my good friend... It is, after all, debate -- and we have both taken good jabs at each other. I expect that to continue... I would be insulted if it didn't.

I read about the Obama tax dodge plan and my immediate reaction was bad, then my reaction was positive. Now, I'm not sure. I mean, how far does our government's sphere of influence go? I see good and bad here and I want so badly to ding companies that have moved jobs overseas. I don't like calling customer service and end up talking to someone in South Korea! Lovely people, those South Koreans... they try mightily to help, but are a little hard to understand sometimes. Keep American jobs in America, damn it!!! But can our government demand taxes from a business that is brick and mortar in an entirely different country?

I'm concerned about Obama's "pay to work" tax incentive. Sure, I've an extra $50 a month... my wife, too. However, I'm hearing that the IRS will take back my wife's portion next year. Fortunately, our withholdings already are such that it won't hurt us... but I see where some people are going to have a surprising tax bill next spring. Is this really a wise thing to do to people? Yes, they don't want couples "double-dipping". But, wait... why is receiving a tax rebate or refund "double-dipping"... yet it isn't "double-dipping" when a couple both working has taxes taken out of both their checks? Hmmm... Could someone explain it to me?

With regard to your question on gay marriage, my gut instinct is to not support it. But my gut instinct is also to not really care what other people do; not my business. In the end, I'm certain gay marriage will make the cut. Whatever you personally want to do, Greg, is your business... I'm basically non-responsive to the issue. It's not something I'm going to get worked up over either way. Not sure if this the answer your expected or hoped for from me... As for other "Republican" values issues... I feel as if the party has abandoned their core beliefs on many of these sorts of issues and they no longer represent my personal beliefs and values. One issue they have abandoned and left unresolved is that of illegal immigration. I live in California... 'nuff said.

[Greg's GL]

You pose some good questions regarding America's reach. It will be interesting to see how it plays out when there's a bill put forth. I guess we will all have to wait and see until then unless there's someone with more insight into the issue. For example, I know my company got tax breaks from the state and county for building an office in Lake Mary with the promise to hire X number of people. But when they start laying off workers here to then hire more in India, should those tax breaks continue?

The issue of "pay to work" is one I that I will have to plead ignorance. Do you have any links outlining how it will play out next year at tax return time? I'd be interested in checking that out. One thing I will say, giving me an extra $40 or so a month is supposed to help me out somehow? I am disappointed in that aspect of the tax cut plan for sure.

I can't say I'm thrilled with your response. But like the old saying goes, don't ask the question unless you're prepared for the answer (and yes, Steve. I do agree with your assessment of the whole Miss California thing and Perez in particular). So, Brian....since you didn't answer my question the way I wanted you to, I'm going to make your image into a voodoo doll and get back at you by doing stuff to it!

But you're a little contradictory in saying it doesn't "bother" you yet you won't support it. Strange, but no big deal for me. I am a little hurt by your stance, but so be it.

The immigration issue needs some attention. That's true. But it's gonna take some time. The issue has been ignored for something like what - 20 years - so there has to be something functional put in place. We can't simply pack all of 'em up and ship 'em back to where they came from without some consequences to our economy. But things can't continue on the way they are because for one thing, the cost to the taxpayers for their healthcare (emergency rooms) and education is getting enormous.

No hard feelings though buddy.

[SteveFrame]

Thanks for the comments guys. I appreciate all of you in here.

Greg, about 2 or 3 pages back there is a link about how the tax time thing will play out. I did have it in my favorites but I can't find it now. Basically if you work 2 jobs - like my boyfriend does - or both the husband and wife work 2 jobs - next year at tax time you will have to pay back the amount of the tax break you got this year for one of the jobs or for one of the taxpayers in your home. Apparently the IRS and the government were aware of this but released the tax tables anyway with hopes of trying to fix it before next year.

As I said back in January or February I think it was in here - when my BF went to get his taxes filled out this year his accountant told him about it then and warned him that next year he would have a substantial amount to pay back. He is trying to get it fixed to where he is having a whole lot more taken out to lessen the amount he owes back next year. But in figuring with the amount he is now having taken out, he is not seeing any extra on his check at all.

Plus with me since I still work part time and draw my social security I am going to have to pay back next year too. My pay back will be a lot less than Gil's will but I will pay back this time - for the first time in many years.

*****************************

As to how far government should go and how far government should be involved in our lives, I guess I am still a product of being raised during some of my formitive years during the hippie movement of the late 60's and early 70's. I just have a big problem with government being involved in our daily lives that much. I don't like them telling me to wear a seat belt even if it is for my benefit, or telling me who I can marry and who I can't, who I can [!@#$%^&*] and who I can't, and I especially don't like them telling what part of the body I can do that in either, or if I choose to smoke where I can and can't smoke at, and on and on.

And I guess you can say I am heavily influenced by being rasied by parents who were big on State's Rights. I don't have a big problem with a lot of what the State does and governs. It just really bothers me when big brother steps in for some reason.

There are just certain things I feel should be left to us as individuals to decide or if they are regulated let it be on the State Level and not the government level.

For one thing I think Government has gotten way too involved in some issues that it is distracted them for the things they should be dealing with. It is an idea of spreading yourself too thin and things suffering in the process.

Edited May 5, 2009 by SteveFrame

[UCLAN]

Well Steve Frame, we must be about the same age. My views were also shaped by the 60's and 70's.

I remember the tax post and what you said. I think that the tax tables came out for next year and it does reflect that some people getting a break now will end up having to pay it back. To me it's another sign of government agencies not being on the same page, not communicating effectively. It will be interesting to see how that is resolved. I have paid the IRS a couple of times and it is not fun.

[MTSRocks]

Obama ROCKS!

[GoldenDogs]

Thanks to Steve for clarifying the "pay to work" tax break mess!! Like you guys, Steve, we are kind of prepared for it. My wife had reworked her withholdings last fall after we got married so we shouldn't be bit too badly by it... Tax codes, etc., are something the government can't just blindly make changes to! Hell, if the government can't figure it out, we definitely can't!

Hell no! They should be zinged hard! I'm tired of America being sold up the river... same reason I buy American grown vegetables instead of Mexican or Chilean grown ones!

I'm sorry you're hurt by my stance... but you should't be because my stance is actually a non-stance. I sound contradictory because I'm not firm either way in my opinion. I'm torn about it.

I'm really passionate about this particular issue. I suppose Roman will call me a bigot because of that. But I see the damage being done financially to our country... but it is more than we realize. Education suffers... neighborhoods suffer... the mortgage crisis has been made so much worse by this issue, too. And I wish you all could see the problems from my eyes living here in California. My wife and I have endured TWO car accidents in the past MONTH and in both cases, we were dealing with unlicensed, uninsured and most likely illegal residents. No wonder insurance rates are through the freakin' roof.

Good cuz I think the world of you... and value your friendship! <<hugs>>

[SteveFrame]

Tennessee is one of the states that finally gave in a few years ago and voted for illegal residents to be able to get a driver's license. It ended up costing them millions of dollars as every illegal resident from even all our neighboring states made a run on Tennessee to get a valid license. They had to hire extra workers to deal with it. Finally after about a year and thousands of problems they required that you had to have a valid Tennessee address to get one.

All this was in the hope that if they had a license at least when they were uninsured and hit someone they could presecute them to get the money.

Several studies have shown recently that they do have licenses now, but they are still driving with no insurance and as of yet insurance companies have been unsuccessful in an overwhelming majority of cases to get reimbursement on any money. Often times they either take off to addresses unknown or file bankruptcy.

I have no problem at all with anyone coming here from a foreign country but I do feel that the issue is a bigger issue in this country than the majority of politicians want to admit.

Our county hospital last year had to write off millions of dollars in uncollected medical bills that were all associated with illegal residents. Add to that the amount that was for uninsured residents and they almost had to file bankruptcy. They appealed to the government for help and couldn't get enough to aid them, so they changed the status of the hospital from a country hospital dependant on government aid to a regional type hospital. Now they do not have to treat uninsured patients. All they have to do is stabilize you and ship you off to the nearest hospital which is almost 50 miles away. It has left a huge amount of people in this area without a place to turn to. There is one county hospital that accepts uninsured patients about 20 minutes away but going there is seriously taking your life in your own hands.

We have had to deal with school overcrowding - forcing for awhile the schools to purchase these small trailers to use as extra classrooms. They were hot in the spring and cold in the winter as they had no heat or air. They didn't have working plumbing so the kids had to go back and forth to the main buildings for the bathroom.

They have had to hire extra teachers and so many other things to accomodate the illegals who have moved in here. The sad thing is that the school budget has gone up but the ones who have forced more schools to be built and more teachers are the ones who own homes and property and are not putting any money back into the county where the school board gets the money for it's budget.

I just feel if a person can't come here legally and become a citizen in a proper amount of time, he needs to be sent back. And quit making allowances for them and forcing changes upon the citizens of this country to accomodate them and make it easier for them. They should worry about adapting to us instead of us adapting to them. We can meet them somewhere in the middle but lately it seems like we are doing all the moving toward them while they stand there laughing at us.

I have seen many many studies in the last few years that have predicted that if something is not done to control the population of immigrants coming across the border of Mexico it won't be too many more years that the Mexican or Latino race will be the dominant race in the United States with whites being next and African American's pushed on down the line.

I don't know whether those predictions are true or if they will ever become true. But it isn't hard to believe when I walk around in our Wal Mart and some other stores sometimes.

I want America to keep it's open door policy. I want us to be a haven of rescue and for people to try to get the American dream. I just don't want Washington to give America away in the process.