Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: For Every Example of Republicans Screwing the People, There is an Example of Dems Screwing Them

Posted 2 years ago on Feb. 21, 2012, 11:45 a.m. EST by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Most on this forum tend to lean towards the left, which is understandable. Im socially REALLY liberal.

But when it comes to economics, the Dems screw you hard. Real hard. Relentlessly. Along with the R.

Until the electorate starts judging by actions, not words, then the country will conitnue to stay divided, and focused on the other guy as opposed to their own.

Which mean zero accountablity.

105 Comments

105 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Yes, the establishment of Social Security, Unemployment insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Section 8 housing, welfare, the Affordable Health Care Act, are all examples of the Democrats screwing you.

What horse shit.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

SS- was simply a way to tax the people. Hence why its now broke. They never intended to give any back.

The amount of abuse int eh system is incredible.

I agree that medicaid and medicare are good, Im in favor of more of that. But this Obamacare is crap, its pure fascism.

For every example of something they did that was meant to be good, there are examples of them screwing you.

How many people do you know that abuse the food stamp program?

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

hchc ... calling the Healthcare plan written by Congress (not Obama) ... fascism ... is BS & Insane ... the plan is simply a way to remove the corruption from the healthcare system in a way that doesn't devastate the economy more than it is ....

If anything ... I would call it an easing on the removing of Corporate Welfare from the HealthCare Industry

[-] 1 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

What planet are you on? His own party with the exception of Harry and Nancy (Who wrote it) are running so far away from it in fear of there political lives it's not funny. They promised healthcare reform and instead shoved a bill that WILL bankrupt the country faster than any other program the government has ever enacted. It removed nothing from the system and HealthCare companies have already begun bleeding the system dry again. It actually makes it easier for them under his law.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

ok I'l play BW.... got any facts to back that up ?

[-] 1 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

Like most on here, nothing I say is going to convice you so do it for yourself. Go to a doctors office and ask them how good this "Healthcare REFORM" has been for them. I can tell you that the tons and tons of letters, emails and blogs that are being sent to Congress about it (and are public record) tell the story.

[-] -1 points by owsleader2038 (-10) 2 years ago

Recall Talking Points 101 on the Obama-OREO lecture circuit.

Anything that comes from the OREO is good, by definition.

You can argue with these buffoons forever on this forum and they'll never concede that OBAMA (DIMON) and/or CLINTON were assholes on the WALL-STREET-BANKER payroll just like the Republicans.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Holy shit. And why would you think this? Because you are a registered Dem?

Congress will pass PIPA. It passed NDAA. It passed three more free trade deals right after Occupy started (unions fuckin loved that :)

It keeps Gitmo open. It keeps droning and killing. But you trust it with the insurance cartel, which funds bothe sides (like all good multinationals)..

Really?

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

hchc, I've been a registered Independent for 30+ yrs... I do not vote party line... and Congress is a disaster ... can we not all agree w/ that ?.... as far as the healthcare plan... well ... I listened to almost all of the hearings... the escalating rise in healthcare costs needed to be slowed down immediately... the Dems wanted single payer... Obama stopped that ... he said (in my words) ... I am not going to put another 14% of our economy out of work right now... in this recession ... figure out a better way... referring to the health insurance industry

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Thats was their chance. Obama took the heat. The insurance cartel funds all the big Dems, just like the big R.

Those that wanted single payer got fuckin played. Plain and simple. You can come up with all the cute reasons you want, but the bottom like is it was there, it could have been monumental, and they fucked it up.

My health insurance went up again this year. Only time will tell if it ever stops (my doctors say it wont, the lawyers and many Dem professionals agree).

Played like a fiddle.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

I disagree .... so you wanted 30% unemployment ?:

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

If you believe that line of garbage, then you are part of the problem.

They always have a great excuse why they fucked us.

Its always the same.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

wow... it is not any excuse... so what would have been your solution ?

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Single payer. Duh.

Leave it to the dumbass public to think that if the gov gave free healthcare to the people, it would mean that 50million people would lose their jobs.

Sleazy politicians and a dumb public equals corportism paradise.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

that's irresponsible .... single payer would remove all healthcare insurance job's as well as many management jobs... we all want single payer or something similar ... but when and at what costs ? ... and .... we want real healthcare ... not another gov run disaster... how about letting the hospitals and the actual medical staff run their own system ???

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

So you are saying do away with insurance and have doctors and other health care providers charge market rates, meaning rates that can be afforded by the average person without insurance plans? There is some truth to the claim that there would be a lot of unemployed people if universal health care became a reality. But I say, Fuck them. Wall street had no qualms about sending factories across seas, and a lot of those unemployed people found new jobs so I believe that the unemployed who would be made if universal health care became a reality would find new jobs. There is always negative effects when policies change, and in this case the benefits out weigh the costs, IMO.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

I agree ... I was simply trying to speak the facts... how about the California Nurses Association's plan... for all hospitals to self insure ?

ie... what if everyone paid their hospital a monthly fee... instead of paying for insurance ?

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

From what I can gather and vaguely remember during the health care debates, their idea seems like good middle ground. it keeps the decision making process in the hands of the medical professionals and the billing and anti fraud enforcement in the hands of the bureaucratic part of the gov't.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

good link Jesse, thanks... I'll follow thru it all when I get a chance ... maybe we do have opportunity to fix up the HCR ... now that elections are coming... Obama did always throughout the process state that he supported & wanted future changes ....

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

"17% extra UE".......

This country is fucked..

I didnt realize that one in four people I konw is a manager or agent.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

I recall it was around 14% ..(closer to one in eight ... which does seem high still )... which also included those in marking up prescription drugs etc ... and everything that single payer would eliminate ...

we will get there eventually... in fact I believe we will have free healthcare eventually... we just need to fix the employment problem first

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I personally know of no one on food stamps who is abusing the program, though I'm sure there are a few. But I'd rather see a little abuse than millions of people going hungry. Apparently you don't care about that.

Social security has kept tens of millions of seniors from utter destitution. And we are not one penny more broke today because of it. The program is still operating in the black, and will continue to be for decades.

And a program that will provide health insurance to tens of millions of people who would otherwise not have had access to it - a reality that kills 45000 americans every year, and causes millions of bankruptcies - is the opposite of fascism. Denying people that health insurance is far closer to that category.

I realize that, like Cain, you believe you are not your bother's keeper. But I am heartened by the fact that your absence of humanity does not represent the majority of people.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Whoah, first off dont compare me to Cain.

SEcond, this healthcare reform bill doesn nothing to address costs, and there will still be millions who dont have the care. It takes the money out of your taxes if you have it. Gives it to private companies. Thats fascist policy.

Third, if you dont know anyone who is abusing food stamps, then you are too removed from the situation. Your opinion would be thrown out because you are too removed from those who use them.

Im sorry that you think these programs are all "D" programs. Trust me, the R likes to see as many people held down by safety nets as the D. Again, you obviously arent in those cirlces to see this, so I cant really debate it with you.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I said I was sure that a few people did indeed take advantage of food stamps. But you would eliminate the program entirely because of a tiny minority of people. That is frankly heartless and idiotic.

Safety nets don't old anyone down. They sustain people until they can get back on their feet. Or they help them after a lifetime of hard work. The whole "dependancy" canard is a right wing invention, without any foundation whatsoever.

It is true that the health care bill does not cover everyone. But it makes affordable health available to tens of millions of people who would otherwise have no access at all. I would have strongly preferred a universal, single payer system, as do most doctors, But given the political realties of the moment, I'm not sure how possible it would have been to pass. If we can get the Republitards out of office AND clean up the corruption, there might be a fighting chance to see that happen.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

HCR- it was possible to get single payer. they sold us out.

No one said eliminate food stamps. Im saying I see rampant corruption in it. thats what happens when idiots (politicians) are in charge of things.

If you think that people arent relying SOLELY on SS to retire, then you are blind.

If you think that a lot of the safety nets for the poor arent being abuses, then you simply dont have access to those circles.

Why the jumping to extremes? You work in the media?

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

"Im saying I see rampant corruption in it. thats what happens when idiots (politicians) are in charge of things.""
Of course -
turn our government over to Haliburton, KBR, Blackwater,
the prison companies, sure !
And the economic benefit of government run medicare is a complete disaster-
no profits at all - a disaster !

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Who said any of that is an option? It wasnt me.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

" You work in the media?"

No, but I'm beginning to think you work for the Republican party.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Ofcourse you do. That's exactly how they want your mind to work.

"He doesnt seem to see things like I do....hmmmm...he must be a REPUBLICAN."

Why the need to group and shove in a corner?

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Because everything you've said up until now is directly from republican playbooks. Only you, apparently, can't see that.

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Sorry, there are plenty of liberals who think HCR was fascist policy.

There are plenty of liberals, including many poor who live in poor communities, that think welfare needs a major overhaul.

There are plenty of AMERICANS who think that these politicians give two shits about funding medicare or SS, regardless of if you have paid in or not.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

First, no liberal would throw out the new health care law in favor of nothing. I was deeply disappointed (and not a little outraged) that Single Payer was not even allowed on the table. But no liberal in his or her right mind would call the health care bill "fascist". That's a moniker the right wing alone has placed on it. The left does not consider taxation as fascist. Only Republitards and their libertardian cousins do.

Welfare recipients make up less than 3% of the population. The reform liberals want have to do with making access easier and payments larger, without the onerous requirements of forcing mothers to leave their children to work at jobs that actually pay less than minimum wage in order to qualify. Liberals aren't concerned with the recipient's abusing the system, but the fact that more people need the system than are allowed into it.

I personally don't care whether politicians give two shits or not. It is what they do that counts. And republtards constantly try to eviscerate the programs (or privatize them) while Dems work to fund them. I think the Dems have to do a much better job, but being ineffective in their PR campaign is a far cry from actively trying to dismantle the programs, which is what the right has been doing from the day those programs became law.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

"No liberal would throw it out"....tell that to the ones I know.

Im thinking our definitions of liberal may be slightly different.

"None would call it fascist"...maybe not the ones you know, but then again, you clearly dont hang with too many people who arent middle class, seems how you dont see any abuse in the food stamp program.

Come talk to some people with me, or in my hometown of Rochester NY, and see if "liberals" aren concerned with abuse.

It is what they do that counts. And none of them give a shit. But dont worry, the cuts that are coming, because of everyone's falling for media bullshit, will screw most of us, but they will be fine.

MOst of the fighting on these major programs is just diversionary shit, to keep everyone interested.

Bottom line, the country is going to look like Greece soon.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

First , I have never even been close to the relative luxury of being middle class.

Second, no liberal would throw out the plan IN FAVOR OF NOTHING. Funny hoe you ignored that last part. A typical Libertardian tactic.

Third, most of these programs keep people alive. Period.

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Im sorry to hear that. But if you dont konw anyone who is abusing the system, and are now JUST getting on them, then you are still too removed to be talking about the abuse, either way the arguement goes.

I truly hope that everything works out for you. I think that being someone who is proactive (assuming your politcal actions arent limited to just interenet) means that you will find an opportunity.

Good luck in your ventures.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I appreciate you good wishes. However, it does not change the basic discussion.

What has changed is that I realize I have no idea what your point is. You SEEM yo be saying that we will start looking like Greece soon. That appears to be your primary objection. But you never say in what way: draconian austerity measures or bankruptcy from irresponsibilty? And you seem to be laying blame for that on social safety net programs. Your primary objection to the health care bill appears to be that it doesn't adequately address costs, not the issue of its lack of universality. And you never come right out and say it, but you seem to have a problem with the mandate for obtaining insurance. I wonder if that it what you are calling "fascist."

In other words, I have no clue what your problem is with food stamps, with the health care bill, or with any other thing you have mentioned. And although I agree with the fact that most of the media provides nothing but distraction, I don't know what "cuts" you are afraid of coming down the line that they are distracting everyone from.

So if you detect a certain frustration with what you say, it is the frustration about the fact that you aren't really saying anything. There is just a lot of vague innuendo and lack of specifics.

Combine that with the overall impression you leave that you don't support OWS, and the question is begged: why are you here?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

do not discount the internet

I try to avoided using "you" in posts

inflames argument

[-] -2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

You are too removed from the situation to be taken seriously. later.

[-] 5 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Really? I have my own application in for food stamps at this very moment. This after having worked for every penny I have ever gotten since I was 14 years old, 40 years in the work force. I am entirely destitute due to having gotten ill and losing my job, and my food has been provided by friends for the last several week, because the system won't even process my application without a six week delay.

So you can take your superiority and "closeness" to the system and shove it up your ass.

[-] -3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

First, if you dont know anyone who is abusing the program, then you are. Sorry.

Second- yes, plenty dont like fascism. Again, obviously you arent around those that think for themselves.

Third- yes some do. No one ever argued that. Glad to see you jumping to extremes as usual...

[-] 5 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

One more time. I don't PERSONALLY know anyone abusing the program. That doesn't mean a FEW don't. The amount of people using food stamps is currently in the tens of MILLIONS. If a few thousand abuse the system, it does not condemn the system. The fact that it provides enough for subsistence level nutrition doesn't make for massive losses. THose losses are negligible. That's what most people understand, other than libertardians (who oppose all social safety net programs to begin with).

Nobody likes fascism except fascists. That covers most republitardian politicians. The health care bill, which will allow tens of millions of people access to health insurance, is NOT fascism. It is the opposite of that. Saving lives instead of ensuring misery and death is the opposite of the evil that fascism is. Unless your definition is different that the rest of the world's.

You never argued that? Bullshit. You keep harping on people abusing the food stamp system, as if it is a major problem. It implies nothing other than a condemnation of the system of food stamps itself. There is no reason to keep your focus on the recipients and tar them broadly with the accusation of theft if you approve of the system, or had any idea of the minimal amount that is improperly disbursed.

The real theft is not among the tens of millions of hungry, out of work, desperate people. The real theft was perpetrated by Wall Street that put so many of these people in such a position in the first place, and the deregulation that made such theft possible.

[-] -1 points by ZenWhoreDog (5) 2 years ago

Yes, and the moral high ground belongs soley to the Dems.

  Dumbocrats
        Are
  Dun(ces)
[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

It sure as hell doesn't belong to the Republitards.

[-] -1 points by ZenWhoreDog (5) 2 years ago

It belongs to neither, but you libtards don't see that.

   Dumbocrats
        Are\
    Dun (ces)
[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Sorry, but republitards are the minions of hell. Dems, maybe purgatory, but it's still a step up.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

Seeing this kind of partisan bickering in a group aimed at representing the 99% (not just the left side of the 99%) is pretty sad.

FAIL.

[-] 2 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

It's typical. OWS has no interest in resolving issues with all Americans, only those that see it there way. That is the sadness of it that I have seen so far. I have actually talked to some very good people in here on a variety of issues, unfortunatly, they are mostly over shadowed by the hard core left wingers who have high jacked the movement.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

The 99% in the mid 1860s were plain old soldiers. A bunch of the them were fighting for the Confederacy to uphold slavery. They were just ordinary folks. BUt in order to defeat slavery, those humble foot soldiers had to be fought to the death.

Today, the foot soldiers for maintaining slavery are the members of teh republican party. They may very be in the 99%, but they are actively fighting against ordinary people, fighting to maintain the supremacy of the Wall Street slavers. Indeed, none more than they created the inequities that OWS is fighting against.

To help the 99%, including them, their ideology must be fought to the death.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

It wasn't so much hijacked, as it was always meant to be a far left movement. Started by anarchists with views of an egalitarian society. Pretty much ending capitalism and the form of government as we know it. Read David Graeber. It's pretty much his views that are the driving force of Occupy. The most dedicated of the movement, those participating most actively on the ground, are those with similar views. Most of the moderates have moved on.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

It's just sad, that's all. To see people claiming to represent 99% of the population who actively demonize half of that 99%.

[-] -2 points by owsleader2038 (-10) 2 years ago

Your 100% correct.

There is NO interest in resolving because the OWS is just a CIA manufactured business to create 'protest fatigue' in the USA.

The usual suspects that you find here are the same people on the DNC payroll for 50+ years, they don't care about anything, because all they care about is their paycheck they get from the DNC.

This is why 99% of the 'people' on this forum protect and coddle the SEIU, because the PUBLIC UNIONS co-opted the OWS long ago.

Real anarchists don't want to have anything to do with monolithic power, not unlike Stalin-ism is the modern US CORPORATE FASCIST GOVERNMENT state that the OWS protects and coddles.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

The foot soldiers of evil are still evil. Republicans as a whole oppose everything OWS stands for. They don't identify themselves as part of the 99%, and are working as hard as they can for the 1%. They are no friends of this movement.

[-] 2 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

But your missing the point. If OWS represents the 99%, half of that demographic are Republicans that you don't want to represent so how can you call yourself the 99%? If anything I guess you should call yourselves the 99% of the --% of Democrats because the moderate dems won't even follow this movement anymore and indep such as myself are having a really hard time trying to figure out what this movement even stands for any more.

[-] 1 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

And like wise OWS opposes everything that comes out of a Republicans mouth ergo the problem. Niether side is willing to listen or recognize that the best way to do something might not be there way.

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

I think the point is that it can't hurt to reach out to "moderate" Republicans. There are going to be those on the lunatic fringe that make that entire party look bad, but I think TechJunkie's point is that there are also a LOT of average Joes who are NOT at all like that, and may just disagree with us on some social issues. If we all agree on the same financial goals (ending Citizen's United, lobbyist reform) then I don't care what party you come from.

Its the far-right wingers who are kissing 1% ass. Average Joe Republican just wants to keep his taxes low, so he unwittingly votes for the Republican elite who promise him that year after year, while giving themselves and other 1%ers the same bonuses.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

Republicans are part of the 99%, and plenty of them agree with Occupy goals like getting the money out of politics. You're dismissing about half of the 99% by demonizing Republicans.

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

obamas best friends are the 1%. they support him , he supports them.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I think it is now threatened with being broke (it isn't actually) because of periodic raids. I really would like to see an analysis of what would be in the SS fund without the regular raids by Congress. Then the record of the parties of who raided it for how much.

Of course it is a tax. That is how you pay for things. There is no excuse for corruption except for people not insisting on stopping it.

Of course there are better solutions than Obamacare, but nobody in politics is suggesting them.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

epa.... ;) ... but it IS a fine line .... unless we let go of the hold... and allow an entrance for the opposition to participate ... we will never include them ... and we need too ... if we are going to reach the 99% ... we need to acknowledge and understand the concerns ... and them maybe we can build something better ...

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I understand the concerns very well. And that is why I will oppose the rebulitards at every turn. The opposition has proven, time and again beyond counting, that they favor inequity, favor unregulated capitalism, favor the status quo, disfavor civil rights, oppose assisting the disenfranchised, and on and on. I have no wish to accommodate the the right. Chamberlain and Obama both made that error. The right IS the 1% and its defenders. I wish to defeat them.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

well... epa... if I had to chose a side ... I guess I would have to agree w/ you... however I think we can unite.... at least for 99% of us

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

The oppressed should NOT unite with those intent on oppressing. The soldiers of the Confederacy were just regular folks, too, part of the 99% of their time, but they fought in support of slavery, and had to be fought AGAINST in order for the entire nation to be free.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

agree... but I keep wondering how many on the side of the Confederacy were close to switching sides ... I keep thinking we need both fronts ... one that shows the opposition and the other that opens a door... I might be wrong...

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

C'mon, Brad. The Confederates are STILL fighting. How many "state's rights" arguments have you seen on these fora alone? If the Union had waited for Confederate soldiers to switch sides, we would still have slavery.

Look, I like your egalitarianism. I think it is motivated from the right place. But I am as sure as I am breathing that it is misplaced. The opposition is working as hard as it can to keep the door bolted shut. They are the opposition precisely because they oppose us. And to get through that door, we have to walk around them, through them, or over their bodies. They are NOT on our side. They are the opposition. They are the 1%'s foot soldiers.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

ok... I'm sold... maybe leave the door open by trying to acknowledge and identify some of their positive ideas while firmly declaring their false ones as false...

[-] 0 points by mediaauditr (-88) 2 years ago

Environmental Protection Agency 1, you sure have big buckets of water to carry don't you? Every post, you sound like the spawn of Chris Mathews and Rachel Maddow. Are you proud of yourself? For supporting such corruption, as we see with our current 2 party system?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reasonably proud of myself, yes, thank you. I don't support corruption, but I live in the real, rather than fantasy Utopian world. And I would support the formation of a third, forth and fifth party. BUt until they are formed, and have any reasonable chance at success, I will continue to oppose the worst of the current two, the republitards, while also supporting activism to expand those choices.

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

the extension of the "tax cut" steals from the only way S.S is funded. obamacare ( affordable healthcare act) slashes medicare /medicaid by 1/2 trillion dollars.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

"the extension of the "tax cut" steals from the only way S.S is funded"

That was the Republitards doing. It was the only way, given who is in control of the House, to pass the extension, which is needed right now. The money from SS can be restored, and would be if the Dems had their way. It is a political reality, not collusion by two parties equally invested in destroying the hopes of the needy. Only one party has so far consistently abandoned the poor.

As to Medicare, it TAHCA does NOT slash 1/2 trillion dollars from Medicare. It proposes slowing down the growth of debt by that amount, and no one believes it will do so. There are no cuts to the program in the legislation.

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

sorry, obama care cuts medicare by 1/2 trillion $.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Not in the legislation I know about. it proposes to cut the growth alone. It was considered, even at the time of the signing, to be a little more than slight of hand wishful thinking, designed to placate the right wing with illusory future savings.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

it's for real.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Show me.

[-] 0 points by buik6 (18) 2 years ago

i didnt read the text above yours but i gave you a point for delivery

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6883) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Yeah the dems never try to raise minimum wage do they? Wait a minute they do.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I look forward to your economic list in two column's, I assume.

I assume we will need a second list for social issues, also in two columns?

And then a governance list, two also?

I guess these might be useful, but I am not exactly sure how.

[-] 2 points by Breadwinner (33) 2 years ago

You can't even have the conversation until people of different ideals are willing to sit down and discuss and comprimise. So far, that just isn't going to happen. OWS/Tea Party are unwilling to even hear what the other side has to say so you can for get Utopia any time soon. Niether side is less guilty on that. If it's not tree hugging love for all OWS doesn't want to hear it and if it's not gun totten, chew spitten than the Tea Party doesn't want to hear it.

[-] 2 points by ironboltbruce (371) from Miami, FL 2 years ago

POLITICAL LABELS

“Democrat”, “Republican”, The parties of the system; Puppets both, for sale their votes, No character or wisdom.

“Liberal”, “Conservative”, For change or status quo? Pick either one, the change is none, All charlatans and whores.

Far “Left” we place the Anarchists, Libertarians claim far “Right”; Yet both decry the government: False continuum brought to light.

For oil, “We” bomb their mud huts, Strip them bare, then offer “Aid”; And fake their retribution as Pretext – a false flag raised.

Unarmed hundred thousands killed By weapons of “Defense”, While rights are lost for “Freedom” sake - On profit, all depends.

With stroke of pen, the “Patriot” Act, And patriots’ gifts are taken; Then “Citizens United” leaves Our citizens forsaken.

We protest loss of liberties, Put “World Wide Web” to use; Cloudmark Authority censors us For “messaging abuse”.

They label us to finger-point, With labels, “They” deride us; Their labels keep us all at bay, For with labels, “They” divide us.

– IronBoltBruce

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

NIcely done my friend.

[-] 2 points by craigdangit (326) 2 years ago

Bingo.

Sometimes I think it would be better if all politicians wore anonymous masks all the time so people's predetermined conclusions don't get in the way and they might actually think about the issues.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

That is an excellent idea. And would finally prove the sutpidity of the electorate.

[-] 1 points by christopherj (77) 2 years ago

I first want to stop the welfare going to those that don't need it, like these billion dollar companies. Then we can talk about snatching it from those that may, or may not need it.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

to even make such a D or R distinction is meaningless. i suggest you pay close attention to what's going on. only then will you discover that they are BOTH SIDES OF THE SAME COIN. they are one in the same, it's called "pedantic" meaning a distinction without a difference. please keep your juvenile, undeveloped understanding of politics to yourself. sorry if i offended, but the distinction is for election purposes only, so they can play each other off each other and deceive the unknowing, less informed, dim witted people--which is most of the electorate.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

hmmm.... another approach to this....

most of the extreme right wing nut jobs I know... are not afraid of "Liberals"

they are afraid of "Progressives" ... maybe we should listen to that....

maybe they are afraid because the Progressive Ideals could pull many from the Conservative parties .... they want change too ... maybe... just maybe ... we could define Progressive as progress from all directions ...

maybe... just maybe ... we could skip the two party division all together and unite the people in a common goal ....

wishful thinking ... i'm sure

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Unity is something the media fights tooth and nail. And wins.

Who doesnt want GE to pay taxes? Who doesnt want equal rights for all americans? Who doesnt want an end to the wars (ok, Im stretching it now)...

But the point is divide and conquer is the go to trick of all establisments. And it ALWAYS works :(

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

yep ... "divide and conquer" ... one of the few things I agree with ya on hchc .. ;) hehe ;)

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Almost every single political thought has two sides...theres never a gray area, and there certainly isnt any agreement.

The whole things a scam.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

better said....

Almost every single political thought has many many underlying thoughts.... the media tells us which thought to think.... usually an easy one

[-] 1 points by Denofearth (41) 2 years ago

I agree, but with one important caveat. having studied in depth the persons of our founding fathers, and their many different world views, I see one thing which they intended which we long forgotten. Our government is supposed to be comprised of average American citizens who feel compelled to serve their nation, not this rich man's club thing we have going on now. When Harry Truman left office he went back to his farm, refusing pension, secret service protection, or any other perks. Now all we have is professional politicians R or D and even I if you want to count the freaks like Bachman or Rand. By the way if you think Rand is anything other than just another rich man out to protect his own cash you're a fool. Restore America? To the good old days? Like when workers were cherished ( and 36% of all work was done by unions ) Ha! Not in Rands world.

[-] 1 points by buik6 (18) 2 years ago

i think its best to say that occupy does not lean toward republican or democrat, but seeks to improve our world

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

If you dont think most Occupations are planning on voting for Obama, then you havent been to too many...

[-] 1 points by buik6 (18) 2 years ago

thats not the point, tho. nobody was ever camping out for obama lol.

you will never understand. to you, things are political in nature and always will be. to me, the current american political system is merely an afterthought, a result; not a mover. its been that way since i was born and presumably before.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

So you are one of the "this isnt political" guys, eh?

Ive gotten a kick out of your kind since day one...

[-] 1 points by buik6 (18) 2 years ago

yeh youre right everyone was camping out to support obama. lol.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Way to take things right to the extreme. You work in the media?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by christopherj (77) 2 years ago

Actually, they screw us at the same time; kind of like good cop, bad cop.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

There is nothing more dissapointing, as a young political activist, than realizing the people you worked for dont care about you. You labor was for the good of the 1%.

The really frightening part is that 50% of the people still keep working. Still keep thinking that THIS WILL BE THE "YEAR that it pays off.

Most of the other 50% drop off the face of the political map, been there and did that.

Theres a small percentage that wants to keep fighting, but realizes the establisment is a machine that wont change, simply because it doesnt want to.

Hence indies and 3rd parties.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

This forum has really died. In October, my comments on the left would have been gone in no time.

There are only a few here left, and it seems its all the hard core, blindly loyal Democrats (you konw who you are)...

So much for meaningful change.

[-] 0 points by FreeDiscussion5 (12) 2 years ago

You have to ask a couple of question. Why do republicans,, even middle income and some low income, vote republican. Because they feel that with just a little help they will have an opportunity for success and possible wealth. Why do democrats,, even low income,, vote democrat? I have no idea. For 50 years they vote for the failed liberal agenda and continue to get poorer with ZERO opportunities to have success or possible wealth.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

TROLL!!!

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Please enlighten me Jiffy? You feel like these parties represent you?

That must be a nice feeling. I havent had it for quite some time now.

[-] 0 points by JuanFenito (847) 2 years ago

The Democratic Party represents me wholeheartedly. I change my views on things 180 degrees every election cycle to represent what others think, so it works out well most of the time.

[-] 0 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

agree with the division part.... but as far as the Dems screwing you hard... they both do...

the Dems as a whole are trying to assist the impoverished thru legislated assistance at the expense of the whole ...

the Rep's as a whole believe the assistance will trickle down ...

neither are accurate nor good fixes ....

we need to advance our way of thinking