This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I wish it didn't have to be that way, but we're not going to let a bunch of senior citizens wither away on the side of the road in cardboard boxes b/c they didn't save for retirement. Its a flawed system, but I can't think of a better way.
Which i think is worse b/c its everyone else paying for their safety net rather then them being forced to pay for it throughout the years.
What would you propose for the people who, for various reasons, had been unable to work toward they own retirements? The insane, the infirm, the mentally incapacitate, etc.?
MOP and his conservative friends have been saying that for as long as I can remember. Hopefully we can now put the "FFA is liberal" meme to rest once and for all.
Have to be supported by the tax funded safety net. I don't see any way around it. Number of those people is going to be very, very small.elbowrm said:
hmmm, that is a pretty good description of me as well.
When one believes that political correctness is the reason the massive problems aren't being addressed, why shouldn't it be a significant factor for voting? Can I get a list of all the things we are allowed to use to drive our presidential preference?
Well, you'd be wrong to believe that, imo. PC isn't stopping us from talking about health care costs or military intervention in the Middle East or any of a host of other issues. And you need to stop thinking that someone being critical of your opinions means that he's trying to stop you from having them or voicing them.
To be clear, I am not offering this as my perspective. I am offering it as a perspective...one that I've heard several times. There are times I agree with the people saying it and times I don't. For example, I think Obama's political correctness around "Islamic terrorism" has most certainly played a part in not getting things under control with respect to ISIS. Your last sentence is one I am in complete, 100% agreeance, but the guise of "political correctness" also affects that reality as well, especially when they ignore the comment and focus on "how you say it" instead of "what you said". It's become a pretty useful tool of deflection I see quite often.
How? An willingness to address them for what they are is pretty straight forward. An unwillingness to approach them militarily or otherwise as such is pretty straight forward as well.
I still don't get it. I haven't gotten any of the complaints about not using the term "Islamic Terrorism" at all. I just figured it was more basic run-of-the-mill Obama criticism and -- how bout this? -- not really addressing the issue at all.
This is really where I'm at. There's a frustration around no action and the excuses for non action (at least out of the administration) seem to be in the vein we are discussing here. Focus seems to be over the semantics rather than the problem.
Because ISIS works like Beetlejuice; if you say their name three times they get zapped back to that desert and eaten by sand worms.
He's confused because there are a few blowhards that like to dominate the conversation
I'm sure it'd work better than the 6,000+ bombing runs.CBusAlex said:
I wish everyone wishing for boots on the ground got magically transported to a battlefield and their bank accounts reset to zero.
I'm not a big fan of the approach personally, but I believe the current approach is far worse. Going only half way in is far worse than doing it correctly from the beginning, but here we are. I felt the same way with Iraq. Either stay out of it or be prepared to be there for a very long time after the "war" was over. This is the price we should be prepared to pay for sticking our noses into areas that aren't really any of our business in the first place.
This is exactly right. At some point, the GOP needs to tell the 70+ crowd to get with the times. Unfortunately for them, they won't any time soon. A few more election cycles to cull the oldest and it'll be safer to do so.
