Oh God, please don't let Romney win!

reply to post by dontreally

I'm saying split the middle in opposition to largely corporate special interests and break up the exclusively two party system.

There's a lot of data now that's IN with respect to the governance of both parties and the gridlock they bring about fighting over political turf. It's time for a government that is by the people and for the people.

What's all this talk about socialism and communism supposed to mean? I don't get it, although I know that's the "meme" a lot of people have taken in regarding Obama's plan to destroy the country..

Originally posted by FlySolo

Originally posted by nightbringr

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by nightbringr
But yeah.........Canadian beer is better! You just have 10 times our population and get lucky sometimes.

Beer AND getting lucky, for a Canadian, that's absolute paradise, there's nothing greater, unless the hockey game was playing in the background at the same time.

Well, i meant they get lucky and actually brew a good batch of beer once in a while, hence the "Best Beer" titles, but that all works too.

Granville Island honey lager. Nuff said

That's what I drank last night at my buddy's place for our little election night party. It was really tasty and produces a nice buzz!

Originally posted by MRuss

CO2 and ozone regulations will be implemented, world taxation might have begun,

energy production will be reduced and therefore costs increased.

There is no way around, welcome in joining the World who already realized this years ago.

We HAVE TO get away from non-renewable energy such as oil/gas (OBVIOUSLY), because those resources are limited, expensive, hazardous. There is no future in digging up for more oil in Antarctica or Alaska or investing more in coal, this is on the way out - this can ONLY be a temporary thing until all those resources will AT SOME POINT be entirely depleted.

Alternative Energy is a huge market with incredible potential. It is still in its early stages, but THIS is the future, not digging for more oil by destroying what's left on this Earth.

Those countries will be prosperous in the long term who invest into R&D with alternative energies, to at some point MASTER them. More effective, cheaper, without all the negatives of non-renewable energies.

Energy production MIGHT be reduced, but this will only happen as long as alternate energies are still less "effective" as compared to, say, oil and gas.

And because of exactly this, more Research/Development is needed, to make those energies more efficient - UNTIL, ultimately, they will produce cheaper energy. AND, in addition, make us independent from oil from the middle east.

reply to post by NewAgeMan

I'm saying split the middle in opposition to largely corporate special interests and break up the exclusively two party system.

But it's the two party system that leads to that state of compromise.

There's a lot of data now that's IN with respect to the governance of both parties and the gridlock they bring about fighting over political turf. It's time for a government that is by the people and for the people.

Which means what? Both Republicans and Democrats feel their political party does just that.

The threat of capitalism is that can turn into corporatism. The threat of socialism is that it can, and generally does, turn into totalitarianism.

You've already denigrated the 'tea party' as somehow being radical, even though the tea party, in my opinion at least, seems to most adhere to the traditional 19th century idea of liberalism, which is what is most able to protect our freedom.

As Alexis De Tocqueville wisely noted, absolute equality comes at the cost of freedom. You can't have both.

What's all this talk about socialism and communism supposed to mean? I don't get it, although I know that's the "meme" a lot of people have taken in regarding Obama's plan to destroy the country..

You mustn't have read enough to be able to read the signs. Obama's policies is heading in the direction of socialism. This talk of 'spreading the wealth', etc, and much else (too lazy to go into the details, though a simple google search will show you) eventually leads to the state talking control of many things which ideally should remain decentralized.

One big fat issue which surprisingly people aren't paying attention to though it's leading to the exact same situation that existed in weimar Germany is Obama's policy of protectionism. Protectionism is when the government steps in to save a dying corporate giant. This policy is eventually going to lead to a full out governmental cartel of industries.

Originally posted by Flow101
Seems like God finally answered your prayers

I'm just relieved we didn't all get caught up in a hierarchy of "powers and principalities" terminating at the Mormon's planet of the Elohim near the center of the galaxy!

Many of the people who will suffer the most in the next four years.... are the people who voted for him.

reply to post by MRuss

In case you didn't notice, we're on the cusp of an economic recovery, which, given the depth of the recession, and factors like globalization and technological advance ought to generate a sustained, although gradual economic growth cycle probably not seen since the Industrial Revolution or post-world war II era, and that will happen no matter who's POTUS.

As to individual suffering and relief from suffering, that's up to each individual to take charge of and isn't a function of who's POTUS provided that certain securities are safeguarded which include health care coverage, a decent minimum wage (for those workers), access to good Education and Higher Education and to the well paying jobs of the new and recovering economy.

People have to get their own proverbial # together and focus on the things they can change for the betterment of themselves and their fellow man. That's what I'm doing and have chosen to do.

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."
~ Serenity Prayer.

Originally posted by alienDNA

Originally posted by gnosticagnostic

Originally posted by alienDNA
Wow.

If romney won at least we would see a different world.
Or at least we would see the possibilty.


Obama is a lier. A dirty rotten lier. And now he got 4 more years. But it didnt take a rocket scientest to figure out he had already won when the voting started.

considering that you're having difficulty spelling LIAR.. i'm gonna have to ixnay your opinion.

oh im sorry, english is not my native tounge. So ... my opinion is wrong/right due to the spelling? That seems very very ignorant to me.
You seem very very ignorant to me.

Vraiment? C'est votre retour?
Quelle langue parlez-vous donc? Here's the thing... it's called spell check.. you gave no reason for calling the President a liar.. however I did give a reason when I said your opinion was invalid... see the difference?

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Hey, thanks for ignoring my post

In case you didn't notice, we're on the cusp of an economic recovery, which, given the depth of the recession, and factors like globalization and technological advance ought to generate a sustained, although gradual economic growth cycle probably not seen since the Industrial Revolution or post-world war II era, and that will happen no matter who's POTUS.

This despite a 13 trillion dollar deficit.

You don't seem to understand that Obama would very much like an economic collapse. Societal reconstruction is most efficiently done in a period of social chaos, where it can act without the hindrance of democratic processes. All governments have such contingencies built into them.

Oh, but I'm sure you think Obama is the king of "democrats!", don't you?

You talk about him with such sycophantic reverence, it's a bit hard to take your well worded posts very seriously.

Originally posted by MRuss
Many of the people who will suffer the most in the next four years.... are the people who voted for him.

Absolutely.

One of the greatest misunderstandings in this country is what creates prosperity. The Romney campaign was essentially about that--- devoted to the traditional American view of the old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community.

All of these things that define the traditional institutions that made this country great, that's what the Romney campaign was about.

It was rejected.

reply to post by dontreally

And I think you're just a little bit on the paranoid side, like many here at ATS.

I see great things in store for the US, Canada and the Global Economy.

Then again, I'm the eternal optimist and see the largely cynical view as being fundamentally irrational.

In case I didn't notice? You're saying we're on the cusp of a recovery?

Oh that's laughable.

But that's my plan for the next four years...

Just sit back and let you Obama-bots reap what you've sowed.

Originally posted by MRuss
It was rejected.

No, it wasn't rejected in the least, your view is warped I believe.

Equal opportunity and equal access to the American dream and a levelling of the playing field, is what was affirmed.

Building out from the middle class as a bottom up phenomenon instead of from the top down (trickle down) is the path that's been chosen by the American people.

The people have spoken, and much of the ring wing rhetoric in regards to all this talk of socialism and communism is what needs to be rejected largely because it's not even based in reality.

Originally posted by MRuss
One of the greatest misunderstandings in this country is what creates prosperity. The Romney campaign was essentially about that--- devoted to the traditional American view of the old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community.

All of these things that define the traditional institutions that made this country great, that's what the Romney campaign was about.

It was rejected.

Oh please, Romney was rich all his life - what does he know about stick-to-itiveness and self-reliance. He's always had money. Helping out in the community? Did you forget what Obama used to be? Hint: Community organizer. Since when was Romney ever a community organizer to help out the community?

Romney was about tax breaks for the rich - that's it. Why anyone who isn't rich would want to vote for him - I have no idea.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


haha... what an ignorant and weak response.

I guess my book knowledge renders your ability to debate me difficult.

I see great things in store for the US, Canada and the Global Economy.

By any chance, are you trying to apply the "think positively, and it'll happen!!" idea and hoping that it will prove fruitful??

You're so naive, newageman.

Then again, I'm the eternal optimist and see the largely cynical view as being fundamentally irrational.

Ah, ok. So, my claim that protectionism is a step in the direction of socialism is an 'irrational fear' - and not based on the erudite research by a standout expert on the subject like Frederich Hayek??

This is how I see it. Even though you are spiritually mature, here, you are showing that even the spiritually mature can sometimes lapse into spiritual immaturity. What I'm trying to get you to understand - and what you're resisting to even acknowledge - is that Obama is not a savior. Not just that, but that his policies undermine the constitution, insomuch as the constitution seeks to protect certain inalienable rights that socialism necessarily circumvents.

Government needs to be kept far away from business. It has some jobs which are necessary, but protectionism, jumping in to to save a business from failing.. What do you think that does? Think. A monopoly, when it becomes bailed out by government, is now owned by the government. The corporate giant is now within the governments centralized power. You don't see anything wrong with government extending itself into industry? Do you understand how this imperils liberty? Do you know what socialism does to people who 'want' to pursue their own individualistic path??

Apparently not.

And yet "I'm being paranoid". An easy response.

Check yourself NewAgeMan. If you aren't educated in a certain area, don't pretend to be.

I don't pretent to know everything, but I have pretty good evaluative skills. For example, back in '08 when my friend/boss at the time told me, as we were planning an expansion of his operation from just the two of us to a "real company" that in terms of a potential bank loan to facilitate his expansion, his banker indicated that if he was to borrow he ought to do it sooner rather than later because they were tightening up on credit, I said "There it is! That's the sign of the impending economic collapse!" If I was a big time investor I could have timed the market perfectly, got out then and then got back in when the Dow went down below 8000. I have a real knack for recognizing these things, and I see a 20 year expansion in front of us, however fitfull it's been so far out of the gate, and sure there have been some fundamental structural changes largely due to the Bush/Cheney/GOP deregulation of the banking and financial industry (when the piggies all ran to the trough) or what amounted in effect to the largest bank heist in the history of the world, but oh what a learning experience that was!

"All happiness for man must arise exclusively and only in relation to some unhappiness, already experienced."
~ Gurdjieff

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by dontreally

 

I'm saying split the middle in opposition to largely corporate special interests and break up the exclusively two party system.

There's a lot of data now that's IN with respect to the governance of both parties and the gridlock they bring about fighting over political turf. It's time for a government that is by the people and for the people.

What's all this talk about socialism and communism supposed to mean? I don't get it, although I know that's the "meme" a lot of people have taken in regarding Obama's plan to destroy the country..

What's needed is for the next or the NEW generation to "come to power" outside of, and independant from, the present two party corrupted system (corrupted by "elite" ruling class corporate special interests or "corporate-ocracy" - good word).

I like the ideas of this guy Griffin



All that's needed is a good leader and a new party with a moderate platform to split the middle and bridge the gap between what is and what ought to be.

reply to post by dontreally

You may very well be more learned than I, heck I don't even have a university education.

In fact, you're so smart and well informed (and Jewish too) that you ought to run for office! I'm serious.

We need exceptionally well informed, super bright people taking over the helm of the ship of state as the pirates are made to walk the plank..

reply to post by NewAgeMan


How about this, you worry about Canada and we will worry about US.