Does Romney think that America is full of rich people?

[AmericanNation]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

[AmericanNation]

Also, "You're on your own" general means "Freedom and Free Markets are better than serfdom and Central Planning, so I won't impose the latter on you." 

[AmericanNation]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

That depends entirely on one's particular situation, as I once dared to hope was obvious.

Also, "You're on your own" general means "Freedom and Free Markets are better than serfdom and Central Planning, so I won't impose the latter on you." 

Which is, of course, a false dichotomy and the people saying it know it, even if you don't.

Unless you have a magic plan to reverse a march to serfdom after it starts, than there isn't anything false about the dichotomy and if you honestly think about it for ten minutes you can't deny that.  You might think its 'doomsday-ish.'  IDK how to get around your feelings when referencing the facts of History.  Respectfully, maybe you should get around your feelings and think.      

[AmericanNation]

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."  picture
1)I feel so bad for those people in New Orleans who were mislead their entire lives to think “The government will help you, don't worry about it” and inevitably government fails to deliver.
2)[I'm wondering how many "facts of History" and non-feeling statements you feel like you've conveyed here?]
I'm not going to write a book for you in a forum.  Go educate yourself or at least read a little, that is not my responsibility.  If you have a question state it and I may lend you my historical expertise.  
3)[It was liberalism that saved capitalism from the ravages of the Depression ]
I don't even like the use of the word 'liberalism' because it becomes completely meaningless.  Lets say you meant FDR saved capitalism... that is of course nonsense.  FDR's first two terms were a complete disaster.  Some things were not his doing others were and FDR made many mistakes that disqualify him from being a “savior of capitalism.”  In his third term he was forced out of necessity to reverse his war on business in order to build a war economy.  That reversal and half of the world in ashes led to the prosperity you're talking about.

[AmericanNation]

I don't even like the use of the word 'liberalism' because it becomes completely meaningless.  

More meaningful than 'conservatism' given the FACT that its democratic capitalism's one - and only - hegemonic ideology. Furthermore, there is nothing Burkean, even remotely rational, about the contemporary GOP

Exactly my point! you are talking about Classical Liberalism which is probably a good way to describe my ideology - (in part anyway...complexities).  FDR was perhaps the antithesis of Classical Liberalism.  Thus, 'Liberalism' starts meaning nothing and everything and it's a junk loaded word.  You can't call Thomas Jefferson and Fidel Castro "Liberals" it drives me nuts.       

[AmericanNation]

March to serfdom? That's a new one.  Hopefully it doesn't spread like a wildfire a la "class warfare" and "Saul Alinsky radicals."

FYI “The Road to Serfdom” is among the most influential books of all time.  Maybe get the sparknotes.

[AmericanNation]

This new R-WI troll is great, he's like a computer program that shoves Fox News memes into common sentence structures and prints the result.

Right?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not asking you to write a book. There's plenty of room on these forums to express your opinions and conjecture without having to cite it. What I'm calling you out on - and what others will continue to do - is how you want to crap on everyone else, talking about how they're not using facts and how we're all "feeling" instead of thinking. Guess what? You're not using facts either. You're simply making broad-based statements ("freedom is under attack, government's gunna getcha, road to serfdom") without backing them up with any facts. Even your more elaborate thoughts are conjecture, although a little bit better thought out.

Let's not even get on the psychological points of how you guys "think" (feel). You seem to be in denial about what constitutes a rational thought. Liberals think, rationalize and try to debate with numbers, statistics and facts. That's why we get called "elitists" and "out of touch". Conservatives feel the situation in their gut ("I just know Obama's a muslim!") and conjecture based on what their head tells them (whether it's religion, politics or life in general).

You may want to cool the antagonistic tones you're taking toward everybody. People who act like aggressive little sh**ts don't last that long, on average.

Is that your life experience in Georgia?  I have wondered if the dynamic flips in the deep south.  Elitist claims tend to flow from dismissive-ness that ignores the point.  You stumbled on my razor that a dumb republican may have idiotic reasoning, yet is more likely to come to the correct result whereas a dumb democrat may have some reasoning (usually emotional appeal), but inevitably comes to the wrong conclusion.  I maintain hope smart people can rise above.     

[AmericanNation]

Is that your life experience in Georgia?  I have wondered if the dynamic flips in the deep south.  Elitist claims tend to flow from dismissive-ness that ignores the point.  You stumbled on my razor that a dumb republican may have idiotic reasoning, yet is more likely to come to the correct result whereas a dumb democrat may have some reasoning (usually emotional appeal), but inevitably comes to the wrong conclusion.  I maintain hope smart people can rise above.     

You should check out my profile, see where I live and compare that with the Atlas. I wouldn't hold Cheesehead Republicanism in any higher regard, however; it looks as if your legislature is more extreme than ours. The Democrats and the Tea Party actually worked together here to defeat our union-busting bill and the abortion legislation was watered down to 20 weeks (which even as a far-left social liberal, I find acceptable), and that's with nearly 2/3 Republicans in the legislature.

You should look at how you've been typing over the past 15 or so posts. If you had started off with the same style that you are using now, then there would have been more initial respect for what you are conveying. 

I have remained consistent, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.  The Republicans in Wisconsin have been brilliantly mainstream.  I don't think your "extreme" label can be justified, but I'd listen to your point if you have one. 
FYI
1)Never busted a Union
2)Is there an abortion bill you're talking about?  what's wrong with it?
 

[AmericanNation]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nope. From:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind that no "facts" had been provided. Now we're here and there's a definite increase in the quality of your conversational skills.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Historically, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Besides parts of it being struck down, I'm guessing we won't see eye to eye on what the anti-union bill in your state does. I think we can agree, however, that it certainly eliminated the brilliantly mainstream Republican majority in the Senate. Here's a total of four bills (three anti-abortion, one anti-contraception) that Walker just signed this week.
 

So, you don't like the first one? or the second one is really nice compared to the first one? or the second one is mean?  I'm not sure how you feel about them. 

The majority ended?  The Legislature is out of session.  A senator resigned for family reasons at the end of the session.  She probably didn't like the harassment and death threats either.  She also has a medical practice to run. 

As for the "war on women" stuff.  Didn't manufacturing that issue blow up in Chicago's face the last few days? 
The Wisconsin Dems are pathetically pinning their hopes on it anyway.
Wis Dem Spokesman Zielinski, In Lefty Publication, Admits Collective Bargaining Issue Not Hurting Walker; Dems Will Instead Focus On "War on Women" and "Secret" John Doe
http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/04/scott-walker-recall-wisconsin-democrat-union

         

[AmericanNation]

This new R-WI is great

Wonkish...

Thank You.

[AmericanNation]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nope. From:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind that no "facts" had been provided. Now we're here and there's a definite increase in the quality of your conversational skills.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Historically, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Besides parts of it being struck down, I'm guessing we won't see eye to eye on what the anti-union bill in your state does. I think we can agree, however, that it certainly eliminated the brilliantly mainstream Republican majority in the Senate. Here's a total of four bills (three anti-abortion, one anti-contraception) that Walker just signed this week.
 

Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Ohio, Indiana, and Florida have become laboratories for extremist ideology in liberal-to-moderate states. Perhaps Virginia is next.  The GOP in those states operates with different methods, but put them together and one can just imagine what is untended when the potential for repressive power is imposed upon the states slower to adopt the Hard Right as the ideology of the day. The difference between them is emphasis so far, but don't let that fool you. The techniques are being refined for making places like San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, and even New York City unable to stand up to the power of a Hard Right that has contempt for due process, liberal tradition, and rule of law.  

It's for cheap labor, a high birth rate, the degradation of workers' rights, the fire sale of the public sector to rapacious profiteers, the transformation of public schools into propaganda mills, the peonization of the middle class, and the gutting of local control. I have yet to see militarism, racism (except in Arizona), or destruction of civil liberties as objectives... but I wouldn't trust the current GOP with those if it got the majorities with which to impose Constitutional mischief.    

I certainly hope that I am wrong -- but I can imagine a new version of Apartheid imposed upon America based upon where one's politics lie, and in which the job of a policeman or schoolteacher -- or for that matter an accountant ... let alone having a chance to attend school that allows one to learn what it takes to be middle-class in America -- depends upon being a political hack.    

Seattle is next level of difficulty, Rob McKenna will get to practice these techniques on Washington State.

I seriously like these conspiracy theories.  They at least attempt to weave a coherent thread of logic.  That is something that more mainstream democrat propaganda lacks (Logic). 

So, since Republicans are evil and secretly destroying america we should vote for democrats who openly advocate destructive policies.  Wait, but we'll lie about the last part.     

I want to know,
who is coordinating this massive project?
what is the end goal?  Power? 

I sometimes think that type of theory could be possible, but you would need the democrats to be intentionally repulsive in order to drive people toward the Neo-Fascist GOP.  Hey wait, repulsive democrats both driving people toward the GOP and wielding reckless power because the people not repulsed would follow them anywhere....  might be on to something   

[AmericanNation]

I seriously like these conspiracy theories.  They at least attempt to weave a coherent thread of logic.  That is something that more mainstream democrat propaganda lacks (Logic).  

So, since Republicans are evil and secretly destroying america we should vote for democrats who openly advocate destructive policies.  Wait, but we'll lie about the last part.    

I want to know,
who is coordinating this massive project?
what is the end goal?  Power?  

I sometimes think that type of theory could be possible, but you would need the democrats to be intentionally repulsive in order to drive people toward the Neo-Fascist GOP.  Hey wait, repulsive democrats both driving people toward the GOP and wielding reckless power because the people not repulsed would follow them anywhere....  might be on to something    

Given the FACT that Democratic administrations, generally, preside over more 1) economic growth; 2) job creation and 3) more broad-based prosperity care to elaborate what is destructive about them?

I would dispute your "FACT."  That is a LARGE and COMPLEX issue.  I could write an economic+political history of the last 100 years, but that would take some time.  Assigning credit to presidency's is nearly impossible under 600 pages.

An easier thing would be to look at major cities across the rust belt that have been driven into the ground by 90 to 100 years of uninterrupted political domination by the democrats.  Contrast that with the economic engine/fast growing areas of america dominated by republicans and you get a good idea based off hundreds of comparisons of where "job growth" and "broad-based prosperity" comes from.  
 
  

[AmericanNation]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nope. From:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind that no "facts" had been provided. Now we're here and there's a definite increase in the quality of your conversational skills.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Historically, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Besides parts of it being struck down, I'm guessing we won't see eye to eye on what the anti-union bill in your state does. I think we can agree, however, that it certainly eliminated the brilliantly mainstream Republican majority in the Senate. Here's a total of four bills (three anti-abortion, one anti-contraception) that Walker just signed this week.
 

Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Ohio, Indiana, and Florida have become laboratories for extremist ideology in liberal-to-moderate states. Perhaps Virginia is next.  The GOP in those states operates with different methods, but put them together and one can just imagine what is untended when the potential for repressive power is imposed upon the states slower to adopt the Hard Right as the ideology of the day. The difference between them is emphasis so far, but don't let that fool you. The techniques are being refined for making places like San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, and even New York City unable to stand up to the power of a Hard Right that has contempt for due process, liberal tradition, and rule of law.  

It's for cheap labor, a high birth rate, the degradation of workers' rights, the fire sale of the public sector to rapacious profiteers, the transformation of public schools into propaganda mills, the peonization of the middle class, and the gutting of local control. I have yet to see militarism, racism (except in Arizona), or destruction of civil liberties as objectives... but I wouldn't trust the current GOP with those if it got the majorities with which to impose Constitutional mischief.    

I certainly hope that I am wrong -- but I can imagine a new version of Apartheid imposed upon America based upon where one's politics lie, and in which the job of a policeman or schoolteacher -- or for that matter an accountant ... let alone having a chance to attend school that allows one to learn what it takes to be middle-class in America -- depends upon being a political hack.    

Seattle is next level of difficulty, Rob McKenna will get to practice these techniques on Washington State.

I seriously like these conspiracy theories.  They at least attempt to weave a coherent thread of logic.  That is something that more mainstream democrat propaganda lacks (Logic). 

So, since Republicans are evil and secretly destroying america we should vote for democrats who openly advocate destructive policies.  Wait, but we'll lie about the last part.     

I want to know,
who is coordinating this massive project?
what is the end goal?  Power? 

I sometimes think that type of theory could be possible, but you would need the democrats to be intentionally repulsive in order to drive people toward the Neo-Fascist GOP.  Hey wait, repulsive democrats both driving people toward the GOP and wielding reckless power because the people not repulsed would follow them anywhere....  might be on to something   

Feudalism/Fascism. I didn't say anything that's a conspiracy theory, I am just pointing out the fact that Rob McKenna has a high(>50) a chance of getting elected and will try to implement Walker's policies in a blue state especially with the possibly compliant legislature. He also said that he will not be like Scott Walker while campaigning, but we'll see.

So Walker is a Feudal-Fascist? ? ?