Go Back   The PokéCommunity Forums > Off-Topic Discussions > Discussions & Debates

Notices
For all updates, view the main page.

Discussions & Debates The place to go for slightly more in-depth topics. Discussions and debates about the world, current events, ideas, news, and more.



Reply
Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.  
Thread Tools
  #526    
Old November 16th, 2012 (10:07 PM).
Zet's Avatar
Zet
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
So it appears Romney is still crying over the results, and is now saying that Clinton told him that Sandy won Obama the election.

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/romney-clinton-hurricane-sandy-election_n_2137343.html

alternative source: http://www.wbir.com/news/article/242104/193/Romney-Clinton-said-Hurricane-Sandy-helped-Obama
Reply With Quote
  #527    
Old November 17th, 2012 (12:47 AM).
KingCharizard's Avatar
KingCharizard
C++ Developer Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Quote originally posted by Zet:
So it appears Romney is still crying over the results, and is now saying that Clinton told him that Sandy won Obama the election.

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/romney-clinton-hurricane-sandy-election_n_2137343.html

alternative source: http://www.wbir.com/news/article/242104/193/Romney-Clinton-said-Hurricane-Sandy-helped-Obama
I gotta admit it helped him win, seeing how he reacted to the disaster I was even impressed.
__________________
My personal website. UPDATED 8/29/2013
Reply With Quote
  #528    
Old November 17th, 2012 (11:52 AM).
Rodriguezjames55's Avatar
Rodriguezjames55
No Jokes #MegaCharizard
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United states, New York, New York City, Bronx
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Adamant
Send a message via Skype™ to Rodriguezjames55
to be honestly Romney screwed himself up if i was him i would have took sandy as a gift from God and help those in need to woo over the middle class who view him as uncaring and potentionally take some blue states

i honestly hate the two party system #mexicoismoredemocratic
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #529    
Old November 17th, 2012 (12:22 PM).
Went's Avatar
Went
Team Magma Grunt
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Madrid
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Send a message via Skype™ to Went
Quote originally posted by Rodriguezjames55:
to be honestly Romney screwed himself up if i was him i would have took sandy as a gift from God and help those in need to woo over the middle class who view him as uncaring and potentionally take some blue states

i honestly hate the two party system #mexicoismoredemocratic
By the time Sandy hit, the chances of Romney winning were incredibly small and there was nothing he possibly could have done to pick up any blue states- "help those in need?" How? Obama could look presidential and in charge, but Romney held no position of power anywhere and any attempts to do anything would have been seen as propaganda, as it happened with the Ohio rally. And, as I said, his position in the state polls by the last week was so horrible only Obama pulling off a Bush-like disaster ala Katrina could have possibly helped him. Christie was the nail on the coffin but he was already dead by then.

Also, Mexico is more democratic? A country where one party ruled for 71 straight years, and was only defeated for two terms before returning to power recently? Even Utah has had more alternance of power.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #530    
Old November 17th, 2012 (03:55 PM). Edited November 17th, 2012 by FreakyLocz14.
FreakyLocz14's Avatar
FreakyLocz14
Conservative Patriot
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
Quote originally posted by KingCharizard:
I gotta admit it helped him win, seeing how he reacted to the disaster I was even impressed.
We'll be pushing for an investigation to determine to real winner, and not the rigged result that was televised.
Reply With Quote
  #531    
Old November 17th, 2012 (04:02 PM).
Dakotah's Avatar
Dakotah
Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Nature: Timid
Send a message via Skype™ to Dakotah
Quote originally posted by FreakyLocz14:
We'll be pushing for an investigation to determine to real winner, and not rigged result that was televised.
Please, no more conspiracies. Romney accepted defeat. He congratulated Obama. It's over. Let it be and move on. This need of yours and others to insist that Obama could only have won if he cheated in some way is not at all what your country needs. Right now, it needs everyone working together to solve problems. Whining and pointing fingers does nothing except to satisfy bloated egos.
__________________
DAKOTAH
3411-1525-5963

Dark-Type Safari

Personal Website
Canadaquaria Forum nScale.net
"...many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." ~ Obi Wan Kenobi
Reply With Quote
  #532    
Old November 17th, 2012 (06:14 PM).
FreakyLocz14's Avatar
FreakyLocz14
Conservative Patriot
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
Quote originally posted by Jay_37040:
Please, no more conspiracies. Romney accepted defeat. He congratulated Obama. It's over. Let it be and move on. This need of yours and others to insist that Obama could only have won if he cheated in some way is not at all what your country needs. Right now, it needs everyone working together to solve problems. Whining and pointing fingers does nothing except to satisfy bloated egos.
Romney was never really running for President. He is a Bilderger just like Obama. The result was predetermined before the primaries even began.
Reply With Quote
  #533    
Old November 17th, 2012 (06:24 PM).
Zet's Avatar
Zet
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
Quote originally posted by FreakyLocz14:
We'll be pushing for an investigation to determine to real winner, and not rigged result that was televised.
Sorta like how Bush won when Fox News said he won, and then every other place said Al Gore didn't win because Fox News said Bush won?
Reply With Quote
  #534    
Old November 17th, 2012 (06:41 PM).
FreakyLocz14's Avatar
FreakyLocz14
Conservative Patriot
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
Quote originally posted by Zet:
Sorta like how Bush won when Fox News said he won, and then every other place said Al Gore didn't win because Fox News said Bush won?
Bush when the U.S. Supreme Court said he won. Fox News had nothing to do with it.
Reply With Quote
  #535    
Old November 17th, 2012 (07:51 PM).
Dakotah's Avatar
Dakotah
Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Nature: Timid
Send a message via Skype™ to Dakotah
Quote originally posted by FreakyLocz14:
Romney was never really running for President. He is a Bilderger just like Obama. The result was predetermined before the primaries even began.
Yeah. Right. Okay. I'm going to assume you're referring to the Bilderberg Group, and if you are then let me just say that's probably the most ridiculous assertion I've ever heard. It's not even remotely accurate which makes me wonder why you'd make such a claim.

Here's a nice little list of participants, past and current:

Thomas E. Donilon (2012),[3] Executive Vice President for Law and Policy at Fannie Mae (1999–2005), Current National Security Advisor for The White House.
Roger Altman (2008, 2009),[2][97] Deputy Treasury Secretary from 1993–1994, Founder and Chairman of Evercore Partners
George W. Ball (1954, 1993),[98] Under Secretary of State 1961–1968, Ambassador to U.N. 1968 (deceased)
Sandy Berger (1999),[99] National Security Advisor, 1997–2001
Timothy Geithner (2008, 2009),[2][97] Treasury Secretary
Dick Gephardt (2012),[3] former Congressman and House Majority Leader
Lee H. Hamilton (1997),[8][better source needed] former Congressman
Christian Herter,[100] (1961, 1963, 1964, 1966), 53rd United States Secretary of State (deceased)
Charles Douglas Jackson (1957, 1958, 1960),[101] Special Assistant to the President (deceased)
Joseph E. Johnson[102] (1954), President Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (deceased)
Henry Kissinger (1957, 1964, 1966, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1977, 2008, 2009, 2010,[20] 2011, 2012[3]),[68][103] 56th United States Secretary of State
Richard Perle (2011), Chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee 2001–2003, United States Assistant Secretary of Defense 1981–1987 [69]
Colin Powell (1997),[8][better source needed] 65th United States Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice (2008),[2] 66th United States Secretary of State
George P. Shultz (2008),[2] 60th United States Secretary of State
Lawrence Summers,[97] Director of the National Economic Council
Paul Volcker[when?],[97] Chair of the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board and Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979–1987
Bing West (2010),[20] author and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs
Robert Zoellick (2008–2012),[2][3][11][19][20] former Trade Representative, former Deputy Secretary of State and former President of the World Bank Group

Presidents

Bill Clinton (1991),[93][94] President 1993–2001
Gerald Ford (1964, 1966),[12][104] President 1974–1977 (deceased)

Senators

Tom Daschle (2008),[2] Senator from South Dakota 1987-2005
John Edwards (2004),[105][106] Senator from North Carolina 1999–2005
Chuck Hagel (1999, 2000),[107] Senator from Nebraska 1997–2009
John Kerry (2012),[3] Senator from Massachusetts 1985–present
Sam Nunn (1996, 1997),[8][better source needed] Senator from Georgia 1972–1997

Governors

Mitchell Daniels (2012)[108] Governor of Indiana 2004–present
Jon Huntsman, Jr. (2012),[3] Governor of Utah 2005–2009
Rick Perry (2007),[109] Governor of Texas 2000–present
Mark Sanford (2008),[110] Governor of South Carolina 2003–2011
Kathleen Sebelius (2008),[2] Governor of Kansas 2003-2009

Now, unless you have information that I don't, please, show it.
__________________
DAKOTAH
3411-1525-5963

Dark-Type Safari

Personal Website
Canadaquaria Forum nScale.net
"...many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." ~ Obi Wan Kenobi
Reply With Quote
  #536    
Old November 18th, 2012 (01:17 PM).
Rodriguezjames55's Avatar
Rodriguezjames55
No Jokes #MegaCharizard
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United states, New York, New York City, Bronx
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Adamant
Send a message via Skype™ to Rodriguezjames55
Quote originally posted by Went:
By the time Sandy hit, the chances of Romney winning were incredibly small and there was nothing he possibly could have done to pick up any blue states- "help those in need?" How? Obama could look presidential and in charge, but Romney held no position of power anywhere and any attempts to do anything would have been seen as propaganda, as it happened with the Ohio rally. And, as I said, his position in the state polls by the last week was so horrible only Obama pulling off a Bush-like disaster ala Katrina could have possibly helped him. Christie was the nail on the coffin but he was already dead by then.

Also, Mexico is more democratic? A country where one party ruled for 71 straight years, and was only defeated for two terms before returning to power recently? Even Utah has had more alternance of power.
mexico has more than 2 parties the people vote the same party over and over but their elections are far more democratic
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #537    
Old November 18th, 2012 (01:25 PM).
FreakyLocz14's Avatar
FreakyLocz14
Conservative Patriot
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Gender: Male
Nature: Jolly
Quote originally posted by Rodriguezjames55:
mexico has more than 2 parties the people vote the same party over and over but their elections are far more democratic
Thanks, I needed a good laugh! Election fraud ran rampant in Mexico for decades.
Reply With Quote
  #538    
Old November 18th, 2012 (04:26 PM).
TRIFORCE89's Avatar
TRIFORCE89
Guide of Darkness
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Temple of Light
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
Quote originally posted by Rodriguezjames55:
mexico has more than 2 parties the people vote the same party over and over but their elections are far more democratic
Uhhh..... how so? O_o Do tell
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #539    
Old November 28th, 2012 (12:24 PM).
Esper's Avatar
Esper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
The election's over, but the mad, mad world of American politics goes on.

Susan Rice, ambassador to the United Nations, has been under attack from Republicans because she might be nominated for Hilary Clinton's job (Secretary of State) if and when Clinton steps down. Why they doing this? According to John McCain and other Republican senators it's because they have deep, deep concerns about the Bengazi attack (in which the ambassador to Libya was killed) and Rice's subsequent appearances on television to deliver some info to the people about it, info which wasn't the whole picture and didn't include talk of it being a terrorist attack. This, they say, is UNACCEPTABLE. It's POLITICAL MANEUVERING! And so on. Even after McCain and others got to talk to Rice and the acting director of the CIA for an hour face-to-face behind closed doors, they still have so, so, so many questions and couldn't possibly consider confirming Rice to the post of Secretary of State without those questions being answered.

Oh, and TOTALLY NOT RELATED, but Rice is one of two people whose names have been floating around as possible replacements for Clinton, the other name being John Kerry, who all the Republicans says they would love to confirm. The fact that Kerry is a sitting senator from Massachusetts (where Republicans just lost Scott Brown's seat to Elizabeth Warren) and would have to vacate that seat and cause a special election to fill it and which might possibly give Republicans an extra seat in the Senate which they could use to filibuster everything Democrats try to get done there and subsequently call Obama's leadership ineffectual has absolutely nothing at all to do with Republicans' attacks on Rice. No, nothing at all.
__________________

deviantart blog pair
Reply With Quote
  #540    
Old December 22nd, 2012 (02:20 PM).
TRIFORCE89's Avatar
TRIFORCE89
Guide of Darkness
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Temple of Light
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
Another week over, another deal rejected, and America inches closer to the edge of the cliff.

How do you think this will end? What solution or compromise would you like to see?


I kind of like that Boehner upped the tax level to 1million. $250,000 seemed too low to me. That's middle class in my eyes. Obama bumped it to $400,000. Better. But I think the "sweet spot" compromise is $750,000.

Increasing marginal income taxes on upper income earners aside (because that's really the simplest part of this puzzle, I think), I'm hoping to see more real specifics on spending cuts. Because right now the Republicans seem to be suggesting a vague "cut something" and the Democrats are giving an equally unproductive "we'll talk about cuts after you agree to the tax increase". Cuts need to happen. There was efficiencies to be had, but I don't think anyone is being specific enough yet

Also, tax code reform and implementing more of what was covered in Simpson-Bowles as they've already done a lot of legwork
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #541    
Old December 22nd, 2012 (02:39 PM).
donavannj's Avatar
donavannj
The Melody Pokémon
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Minny, Minny, USA
Age: 24
The numbers don't really even support $250,000 as the upper portion of middle-class, however, especially when the median and mean incomes are between $40,000 and $60,000. The upper ceiling is far closer to $150,000.

I think a decent compromise would be a graduated increase in the rate from $250,000, with it peaking to the pre-Bush rates at $1 million this year, and gradually returning the rate to normal all the way down to $250,000 over a period of 7 years.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #542    
Old December 22nd, 2012 (04:28 PM).
TRIFORCE89's Avatar
TRIFORCE89
Guide of Darkness
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Temple of Light
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
Quote originally posted by donavannj:
The numbers don't really even support $250,000 as the upper portion of middle-class, however, especially when the median and mean incomes are between $40,000 and $60,000. The upper ceiling is far closer to $150,000.
I recognize those numbers, I just... don't like them.

If you're trying to live in the suburbs with what is traditionally viewed as a middle class lifestyle, you'll likely need an income of at least $125,000. What's considered upper-middle today, seems to really be what the true middle class once was, is supposed to be, and hopefully will be again - in my eyes anyway.

The middle class is disappearing, I don't think it helps to speed up the process.

Around $750,000 is where the "1%" tends to start, and I don't think households with an income of $250,000 are in the same boat as millionaires and billionaires. If $750,000 is too high a line, I'd settle for $500,000 around 37.8% and 1million+ at 39.6%.

Also... if anyone can clear this up for me since I'm a Canadian. Do you guys have a State-level income tax? Or is just things like sales taxes?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #543    
Old December 22nd, 2012 (08:32 PM).
donavannj's Avatar
donavannj
The Melody Pokémon
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Minny, Minny, USA
Age: 24
Well, that's where the buying power required to have a "middle-class" life is right now, I agree, at least for a family of 4. You used to get that quality of life on far less money, but inflation has driven things upwards in price while wages have not caught up.

Oh, yes, we do have state-level income taxes. As far as I'm aware, every state has income taxes. States also have property taxes and sales taxes, though some states only collect one or neither of these latter two.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #544    
Old December 29th, 2012 (07:14 PM).
Mr. X's Avatar
Mr. X
For Money
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
Just a random thought, but wouldn't laws that ban gay marriage be a violation of the first amendment? As their are religions that support and allow gay marriages, then any law that forbids gay marriage is a violation of the free practice provisions.
__________________
Follower of Carlinism since 2008.

Come play Runescape
Reply With Quote
  #545    
Old December 29th, 2012 (07:23 PM).
Oryx's Avatar
Oryx
CoquettishCat
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 22
Gender: Female
Nature: Relaxed
That's not quite right. If you had a religion where the doctrine was to get gay married then maybe there would be a case, but things can be illegalized that a religion tolerates.
__________________


Theme * Pair * VM * PM

Not all men...

Are all men stupid?

That's right.

Reply With Quote
  #546    
Old December 29th, 2012 (08:21 PM).
Mr. X's Avatar
Mr. X
For Money
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
The idea behind the free practice provisions were to prevent government from interfering in religion, and supporting one religion over another.

Even though it isn't the doctrine, religions that would normally allow gay marriages can't due to laws prohibiting gay marriage. This is government interfering with Religion.

Alternatively, laws banning gay marriages are showing support for certian religions. Given that a large portion of people against gay marriage are so because they believe marriage to be a religious instution, rather then a government instution, then banning gay marriage can be seen as supporting religions that are against gay marriage.

Personally, this is why I've believed that we need to separate marriage by Religion and State. Let all the rights normally given to married couples be given out via the state marriage, and then let the Religious people choose a church marriage. Marriages done under the state wouldn't apply as a Religious marriage, however people who choose a Religious marriage can choose to have it also apply as a state marriage so they would be eligible for the benefits that it gives out.

This would satisfy both parties, as it protects the sanctity of marriage, when relating to Religion (Giving the Religious crowd what they want) while also giving equal rights and benefits to gays and lesbians. (Giving gays and lesbians what they want, and also allowing them the option of a Religious marriage if they so desire and if they find a church that allows it.)
__________________
Follower of Carlinism since 2008.

Come play Runescape
Reply With Quote
  #547    
Old December 29th, 2012 (09:35 PM).
Esper's Avatar
Esper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Quote originally posted by Mr. X:
The idea behind the free practice provisions were to prevent government from interfering in religion, and supporting one religion over another.

Even though it isn't the doctrine, religions that would normally allow gay marriages can't due to laws prohibiting gay marriage. This is government interfering with Religion.

Alternatively, laws banning gay marriages are showing support for certian religions. Given that a large portion of people against gay marriage are so because they believe marriage to be a religious instution, rather then a government instution, then banning gay marriage can be seen as supporting religions that are against gay marriage.

Personally, this is why I've believed that we need to separate marriage by Religion and State. Let all the rights normally given to married couples be given out via the state marriage, and then let the Religious people choose a church marriage. Marriages done under the state wouldn't apply as a Religious marriage, however people who choose a Religious marriage can choose to have it also apply as a state marriage so they would be eligible for the benefits that it gives out.

This would satisfy both parties, as it protects the sanctity of marriage, when relating to Religion (Giving the Religious crowd what they want) while also giving equal rights and benefits to gays and lesbians. (Giving gays and lesbians what they want, and also allowing them the option of a Religious marriage if they so desire and if they find a church that allows it.)
But there are religions that want to practice polygamy and child brides and we don't allow that, thankfully. I mean, I want people to be able to get married if they want, but I don't think we should go down the religion road to make it happen.

I agree that we need to divorce (haha) the idea of marriage from religion. Sure, if you personally want your marriage to be religious then that's fine, but marriage is not something religion should have a say on except when that marriage is taking place within its doors.
__________________

deviantart blog pair
Reply With Quote
  #548    
Old December 29th, 2012 (10:25 PM). Edited December 29th, 2012 by Mr. X.
Mr. X's Avatar
Mr. X
For Money
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Nature: Quiet
I see nothing wrong with polygamy, really. If a person wants to get married to multiple partners, and they want the same thing, then they should be allowed to. They would be limited to a Religious marriage in this case though.

Point on child brides though, I didn't consider that.

Although, I'd say that marriages under either system would have to comply with the age of consent for the state. Then again, this would go against the intentions of the separation.
__________________
Follower of Carlinism since 2008.

Come play Runescape
Reply With Quote
  #549    
Old December 29th, 2012 (11:16 PM).
CarcharOdin's Avatar
CarcharOdin
Master of The Universe
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Monterey, California, USA
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Naughty
Don't like gay marriage? Don't get one.
Don't like that gays want to / can get married? Too bad.

That's my view.
__________________


My Proposed PokeCommunity Dungeons & Dragons game. Leave a comment if interested.
Reply With Quote
  #550    
Old December 30th, 2012 (01:12 AM).
AdrianD's Avatar
AdrianD
Competitive Trainer
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Serious
Im sure there will be no deal done by Monday night, but does anyone have any faith that something will be done within the next month?

I personally would hope so trying to be optimistic, but the pessimism in me says it wont be done and it will just stay as is. Both parties suck.
__________________
X- 2406 5987 8799
PS3 - Mkeborn87
Reply With Quote
Reply
Quick Reply

Sponsored Links
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Minimum Characters Per Post: 25



All times are UTC -8. The time now is 03:09 PM.