You mean this ? - http://firstchurchofatheism.com/
Printable View
You mean this ? - http://firstchurchofatheism.com/
It's okay to call it a theory; that does not imply that there is any question about its basis in fact. Evolution is a fact; Darwin's theory explains it, is testable and predictable and fits all the known data. The problem is those who don't understand, or pretend not to understand, the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. I know what you mean though, it is bloody annoying.
Don't get me wrong, it has been a challenge for Obama to pass any democratic policy though the trammeled Republican majority congress, but he's done plenty of continued wrongdoings by supporting many of Bush's previously enacted policies when he had the option to modify or simply not sign them back into effect. His promises to end "the war(s)" have been an outright lie. Defense budget spending and national security have increased further eroding our constitutional rights as American citizens.
I'm not saying Obama hasn't done America any good. Only that his motives are just as murky as any modern president; Bush included.
I assumed Romney was a moderate. I mean, he could be placating his donors and, too, his base.
I mean, does he himself have moderate positions or extremist positions or is he merely an opportunist?
I mean, politics is acting. So maybe he's one hell of an actor.
And, too, I'm not entirely sure why he's running for President. Frankly, I don't get it. I mean, he's turning 66 next year. He's in his twilight years. He's got all the money in the world.
Does he merely like the conniving aspect of politics? Or maybe he likes raising money? Or the power? Or he likes the aspect of serving the corporate super-rich?
I think he's running because he's needy. He requires more than the approval of his family, friends and church. He wants your approval. He wants the approval of the tea-party. He wants the approval of the republican party. He wants the approval of Boston's progressives. He wants God's approval. He wants to be president for the same reason he wanted to be the class president. He needs universal approval. He'll say what he needs to, to get approval. He is the most needy man in the world. Of course, I may be wrong...he may be the most greedy man in the world :)
Are you kidding? He's absolutely an opportunist.
Bane Capital essentially bought business', optimized them for profit efficiency, and sold them some number of years later. Profit efficiency includes lay-off's, job duty consolidation, lower hiring wages, lower working wages, higher turn-over, fewer benefits to employees, morale decline, and lower product or service quality. American jobs about suck these days because of the actions of Bane Capital among a myriad of other investment companies. He spent most of a decade professionally exploiting the American working-class. I'd say that makes him an opportunist.
Politics is acting as most involved have to focus on filtering what they say. Not just for purposes of implication, but to avoid upsetting public opinion as well. Romney's ability to save-face blows goats for quarters; but before it was Romney, it was Santorum and a long list of other politicians with foot-in-mouth disorder. That's half of the job, though. It's a little insane to think that any president would need to have a honed ability to lie to the public, but it's absolutely essential because nobody would vote for a president who is honest and transparent, no matter whether conservative or liberal.
Okay, enough. I'll try to make it simple. Really simple.
Obama has run the deficit to the 16-17 trillion mark in less than 4 yrs.
The inflation alone is killing the American working class.
If you think 4 more years of him is good for the working class, please by all means vote for him.
Those people you cry for on fixed incomes, and assistance, they might think their voting someone who will champion them, but what do you thinks going to happen when those SNAP cards cant buy enough to fill the fridge?
Georgia Runs Out of Food Stamps! - YouTube
Only one President, Bill Clinton, tackled the deficit in the last 35 years. But he did it on the backs of working people. Plus he made capital more mobile. With NAFTA and free trade "agreements" with China. Hence hurting working people.
The financialization of the economy means vast sums of cash go to a tiny few. It's designed that way. Which makes sense. From Mitt's own perspective. I mean, all this financialization of the economy has been normalized. Free trade has been normalized etc., etc.
I mean, NAFTA harmed and harms the population. It's fantastic for Mitt and his buddies. But harmful for working people.
But corporate and state structures don't take into account the harm they'll cause. Nor should they. It's purely selfish. It's rational.
I mean, capital investment is about making capital, more capital and more and more. Not to say: make the lives of working Americans happier and healthier and a little less stressful -- ha ha ha!
The reason we have a deficit is because of our bloated military budget and our inefficient health care system. Fix that. And you'll have a budgetary surplus.
Bill Clinton remarks on the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement 1993 - YouTube