“Tough decisions have to be made!”

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on August 11, 2011 at 8:56am

Groups of stupid people with guns, Travis..Groups.  You should be worried.  It reminds me of the basic premise of all zombie movies where about 7 people try to ward off 100 zombies.  Moral of the story: How to outwit the zombies?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on August 5, 2011 at 5:51pm

"Never overestimate the intelligence of the general public." 
That's a mistake progressives have made over and over in the past.  However, based on recent polls, a sizable majority of the public support much of the progressive agenda – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , against the wars, tax increases on the wealthiest and job creation by the government if necessary.
It's a bright spot, but if it's strong enough to start a fire, I guess time will tel

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Wood on August 3, 2011 at 9:36am

I would NEVER say prop 8 was right.  I said it was in accord with our system.  Constitutionally, we elect representatives (in most place) to represent us, and the majority (usually) rules.  The electoral college is a bit of an anomaly.

 

Prop 8 was like a big New England town meeting--direct democracy.  Immoral, but not illegal.

 

The constitution, worshipped by ignorant americans, was written by the richest men of america to constitutionalize government by the rich, for the rich, and of the rich. 

 

You don't like it, change the system.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Stanko on August 3, 2011 at 7:28am

Actually, That isn't the case.  You have to win the majority in the electoral college.  Al Gore won the majority of votes, but lost the electoral college.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on August 4, 2011 at 7:55pm

This discussion isn't even in the conscious awareness of the lawmakers in the federal government... I would love to hear it being debated in Congress, however.  Tax revenue from religious establishments....THAT would be progressive and enlightened and helpful and metaphorically 'Christlike'.... so it won't be happening in MY lifetime.  (The Evangelicals in the Bible Belt would put up quite an entertaining show of persecution, I'm sure.)  But everybody needs to be part of the so-called 'belt-tightening' if we're going to take a balanced approach here, right??  I am convinced that President Obama has caved into the recent tea party demands and needs to be more forceful about the need for balanced, shared sacrifice.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roland707 on August 5, 2011 at 11:40pm

I nearly fell over last week when one of my fundie friends said "I believe in jesus and all, but that shit ain't right, preachers and churches not having to pay taxes!"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Maxwell on August 11, 2011 at 4:04am

Um, I don’t know about that. That is to say I’m not in agreement with the idea that churches discretely use issue advocacy.

The Tea Party isn’t exactly non-religious, as it’s heavily supported by church groups, primarily Christian. Their issue advocacy didn’t exactly help us when it came to raising the debt ceiling last week, and I certainly wouldn’t call it discreet. Churches talk politics constantly, churches support politics constantly. If our government is to somehow manage to keep religion out of politics wouldn’t it be a good start to keep the politicians out of the churches? I just figure that if a politician wants to use a religion (or church) as a platform for launching his political career, then that means the religion (or church) supports that politicians ideology and therefore that religion is trying to shape politics. Since churches shape how politics is done in this country at a very fundamental level I think it would only be right if they were taxed for it. I mean it’s not like large corporations don’t do the same thing. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page