chess online
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 Stinky ... |
||||||
|
Im not |
||||||
|
Stinky ... |
||||||
|
ok |
||||||
|
Stinky ... "Compromise" can be as simple as one picking red, another picking yellow, and settling on orange for both. Compromise, in more complex conversations can mean understanding what the other person wants and delivering that to gain what you want in return ... in trials, this is also called a "quid pro quo" and is useful to gain otherwise challenging middle ground compromises ... giving up something relatively easy to give up, for something valuable in return. How you choose to respond to Dm is your choice, and I do not plan to persuade you to do it a certain way over another. But when someone gives you an unacceptable retort, the way you dismiss it or challenge it or ignore it or grapple with it can produce predictable or manageable conversation depending upon your motives or desired outcomes. Whether you choose to do this or not has nothing to do with communication with "libs" [to use your terminology] ... it has to do with communication on complex or multi-layered issues with anyone with whom you want a serious conversation. Sometimes people who are good at such communication do this for their own tactical advantage ... the words used may actually be of lesser importance than the effect they have on their "opponent" ... getting them to respond in ways they might not normally respond for example. Now, either you will take my words with some consideration, or you will reject them completely ... but I have tried to respond honestly and sincerely to what I believe to be an honest and sincere request. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 03-Dec-12, 21:17 |
WHY should Obama negotiate or compromise on something most Americans want? That isn't negotiable and neither is hostage taking (even some in the GOP call it that) end of story. Let the GOP suffer the consequences of defying the people. We can negotiate on a balance of cuts and revenue but NOT on taxes going up on the rich. If you want to jump off the cliff over the rich, lets do it. Young people and minorities need to have seared in their minds the extent to which the GOP will go to to protect the rich white man even if it destroys the country. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 03-Dec-12, 21:52 |
The Koch Subsidiary AKA the tea party The tea party is nothing but the astroturf arm of bigoted, ultra right wing extremist Koch Brothers propaganda machine. The tea party was built with Koch Brothers funding and its dogma is set by the Koch Brothers. These truly evil billionaire white brothers spend billions to corrupt the political system. No compromise with them or their minions is desired or appropriate. ======================================== How The Tea Party Was Hijacked by the Koch Brothers The Tea Party had an opportunity to be a voice for the masses. Unfortunately, they were usurped by the robber barons of the 21st Century -- the Koch brothers -- and have been repurposed to fight in favor of corporate fascism and against democracy. All that is needed to prove out this statement is a look at the movement's platform as listed on the web: 1. Healthcare: No one will argue that our healthcare system is in shambles. America has the highest healthcare expenditure, and gets the 37th best care as a result. We’re also the only industrialized nation that doesn’t guarantee health care for its citizens. When we try to fix something, it makes sense to look around and see what’s working elsewhere, analyze why it’s working, and build on that success. The Tea Party doesn’t seem to support that concept. Instead, their platform doubles down on the same system that got us where we are now. They decry the concept of “socialized medicine,” and instead ask that insurance companies be further unbridled and encouraged to cross state lines to “allow competition” to drive prices down. Unfortunately, that isn’t what will happen. First, socialized medicine is nothing more than a large group of people sharing the medical costs for the entire group. This keeps anyone from being financially destroyed by medical costs, because your neighbors will help you with it. Oddly enough, that’s exactly how insurance works. All of the subscribers pay in to the insurance company, which then pays the medical bills as they occur. No one gets financially destroyed by medical costs because the rest of the subscribers help with them. But there’s a difference. Insurance is created to make a profit. As a result, it’s in the insurance company’s best interest to run medical prices up. This makes sure that it’s difficult to get care without insurance and that they can charge higher premiums for their policies. This mechanism has been driving up medical prices for decades. If you truly want a free market in medicine, there can be no insurance. Insurance companies, and no one else will benefit from the Tea Party platform. Corporations win. People lose. 2. Right to Life: This attack on women’s health is strictly an attempt to foist religious beliefs on people who don’t necessarily share those beliefs. The separation of church and state is clearly defined by constitutional authority. The Tea Party claims to be in favor of making government conform to the constitution – as long as it doesn’t upset their delicate sensibilities or contradict their mistaken interpretation of the document. There is an organization in the federal government whose sole purpose is the interpretation of the Constitution. Its called the Supreme Court, and they’ve already made that decision. Personally, I see organized religion as nothing more than an easy way to make a living for people who think they know better than the rest of us. They also seem to be power centers controlling how people think and act, and even though they have been given “not for profit” status, they seem to have sufficient funds to buy land and build buildings at their pleasure. In my opinion, just like corporations, they’re all about the Benjamin’s, and the Tea Party supports them over people who would like to make their own decisions. This is not freedom. 3. The First Amendment: Similar to No. 2, this is another step toward theocracy in the U.S. All that’s needed is a rewrite of the First Amendment, or an interpretation that agrees with their desire to live in an apparently Baptist theocracy. The list goes on. I invite everyone to read it. A concept that I’ve seen mentioned here on PolicyMic by the right again and again is the “Law of Unintended Consequences.” As I read through the platform statements of the Tea Party I was able to see many unintended consequences, some of which I’ve put forth here. There are more, but the limitations of PolicyMic articles would require multiple articles to keep saying the same things. Read through the platforms with the consequences in mind and if you actually have an open mind you’ll wind up as terrified as I am of these ideas. But the real evil in the Tea Party is their actions after the 2012 Election. America is in trouble, but instead of trying to find solutions that would be palatable to all parties, they have chosen to make sure that nothing is done. This has driven the Democrats to a partisanship that is just as rabid. To use an illustration, this would be the equivalent of having a fire in our backyard. The Democrats, seeing the fire tried to call the fire department, but the Tea Party said it would be too expensive and ripped out the phone cord. So the Democrats tried to turn on the garden hose, but the Tea Party shut off all the water to the house and said, “It’ll burn itself out if you just leave it alone.” They’re right; the fire in the backyard will eventually burn itself out. All fires do in time. The question is whether we or anyone else in the neighborhood will have a house after it does. ================================= Romney Campaign Memo: The Koch Brothers Are The ‘Financial Engine Of The Tea Party’ "The Washington Examiner, which happens to be owned by an allied billionaire named Phil Anschutz, obtained a Romney campaign memo that details its outreach effort to the Koch brothers and the Tea Party. The memo acknowledges what ThinkProgress has reported for two years now — that the Kochs are the “financial engine of the Tea Party,” as the memo put it. Moreover, the memo expands on Romney’s courtship of the billionaire petrochemical brothers, including a meeting in January at an elite social club in Manhattan and an August meeting that had to be canceled because of Hurricane Irene: Americans for Prosperity is led by billionaire Republican donor David Koch, whose endorsement Romney seeks. An Oct. 4 internal Romney campaign memo obtained by The Washington Examiner describes Koch as the “financial engine of the Tea Party” even though Koch “denies being directly involved.” Koch endorsed Romney for president in 2008 and his well-funded group is credited with electing dozens of Republicans to Congress in 2010 and creating a network of Tea Party loyalists who are critical to Romney’s chances of winning the nomination, political strategists say. Indeed, not only did Koch endorse Romney in 2008, but one of Romney’s first major campaign fundraisers for the 2012 cycle was hosted at Koch’s mansion in the Hamptons last year. ============================================ Exposed: Koch Brothers, Karl Rove, Tea Party ‘Coming Together’ With Anti-Gay Groups by David Badash on August 29, 2012 David Brody, the chief political reporter for CBN News admitted in an MSNBC “Morning Joe” discussion this morning that the Koch Brothers, Karl Rove, and the Tea Party are “coming together” with major anti-gay organizations and a hate group, the Family Research Council. New Poll Finds Tea Party Is Political Group That Hates Gays The Most CBN News is the Christian Broadcasting Network, founded by televangelist Pat Robertson in 1961. Brody, author of the new book, The Teavangelicals: The Inside Story of How the Evangelicals and the Tea Party are Taking Back America, is also ”a political contributor to Glenn Beck’s GBTV network,” according to CBN. “We talk about the pro-life groups but the pro-life groups are also the Tea Party type groups, in other words, they’re all coming together,” Brody told the panel, explaining the close relationship between the Tea Party, Tea Party organizations, the Koch Brothers (who fund those groups,) anti-gay organizations, and anti-gay hate groups. “Here’s my point: Concerned Women for America, a pro-life group, they’re working with Americans For Prosperity, Tim Phillips group, and so they’re doing a lot of bus tours together.” Americans For Prosperity was founded by the Koch Brothers. While Concerned Women for America is not technically a named anti-gay hate group, they are mentioned in this Southern Poverty Law Center article, “18 Anti-Gay Groups and Their Propaganda” at least five times. They, their work, and their people have been embedded in several other anti-gay hate groups, like the Family Research Council, Traditional Values Coalition, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, and Chalcedon Foundation, the SPLC reports. Here’s what the Southern Poverty Law Center article says about Concerned Women for America: San Diego, Calif., activist Beverly LaHaye, whose husband Tim would go on to become famous as co-author of the Left Behind novels depicting the end times, started Concerned Women for America (CWA) in 1979 to create an anti-feminist group that matched the power of the National Organization for Women. Today, CWA claims more than 500,000 members organized into state chapters, a radio program that reaches more than 1 million listeners, and a cadre of attorneys and researchers devoted to the group’s mission of promoting biblical values. LaHaye has blamed gay people for a “radical leftist crusade” in America and, over the years, has occasionally equated homosexuality with pedophilia. In 2001, she hired prominent anti-gay propagandists Robert Knight (now with Coral Ridge Ministries; see below) and Peter LaBarbera (now with Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, above) to launch CWA’s Culture and Family Institute. Matt Barber was CWA’s policy director for cultural issues in 2007 and 2008 before moving on to similar work with the Liberty Counsel (below). While at CWA, on April 12, 2007, Barber suggested against all the evidence that there were only a “miniscule number” of anti-gay hate crimes and most of those “may very well be rooted in fraudulent reports.” In comments that have since disappeared from CWA’s website, Barber demanded a federal probe of “homosexual activists” for their alleged fabrications of hate crime reports. CWA long relied on and displayed Knight’s articles and talking points, including claims that “homosexuality carries enormous physical and mental health risks” and “gay marriage entices children to experiment with homosexuality.” Most remarkably, Knight cited the utterly discredited work of Paul Cameron (see Family Research Institute, below) to bolster claims that homosexuality is harmful. Today, CWA continues to make arguments against homosexuality on the basis of dubious claims. President Wendy Wright said this August that gay activists were using same-sex marriage “to indoctrinate children in schools to reject their parents’ values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.” Last year, CWA accused the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a group that works to stop anti-gay bullying in schools, of using that mission as a cover to promote homosexuality in schools, adding that “teaching students from a young age that the homosexual lifestyle is perfectly natural … will [cause them to] develop into adults who are desensitized to the harmful, immoral reality of sexual deviance.” “Family Research Council, the pro-life group, is working with Colin Hanna, and Let Freedom Ring, another Tea Party group. It’s all very much a conglomerate… coming together,” Brody continued. Business Week describes Let Freedom Ring as “an advocacy organization active with ads targeting Obama in 2008 and whose founder is evangelical Christian John Templeton, and Washington-based Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies, which is affiliated with Republican political strategist Karl Rove, are also airing commercials critical of the president’s energy policy.” Tony Perkins‘ Family Research Council, which most of America now knows is listed as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, who notes: Headed since 2003 by former Louisiana State Rep. Tony Perkins, the FRC has been a font of anti-gay propaganda throughout its history. It relies on the work of Robert Knight, who also worked at Concerned Women for America but now is at Coral Ridge Ministries (see above for both), along with that of FRC senior research fellows Tim Dailey (hired in 1999) and Peter Sprigg (2001). Both Dailey and Sprigg have pushed false accusations linking gay men to pedophilia: Sprigg has written that most men who engage in same-sex child molestation “identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual,” and Dailey and Sprigg devoted an entire chapter of their 2004 book Getting It Straight to similar material. The men claimed that “homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses” and similarly asserted that “homosexuals are attracted in inordinate numbers to boys.” That’s the least of it. In a 1999 publication (Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys) that has since disappeared from its website, the FRC claimed that “one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order,” according to unrefuted research by AMERICAblog. The same publication argued that “homosexual activists publicly disassociate themselves from pedophiles as part of a public relations strategy.” FRC offered no evidence for these remarkable assertions, and has never publicly retracted the allegations. (The American Psychological Association, among others, has concluded that “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.”) In fact, in a Nov. 30, 2010, debate on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews” between Perkins and the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Mark Potok, Perkins defended FRC’s association of gay men with pedophilia, saying: “If you look at the American College of Pediatricians, they say the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a danger to children. So Mark is wrong. He needs to go back and do his own research.” In fact, the college, despite its hifalutin name, is a tiny, explicitly religious-right breakaway group from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the 60,000-member association of the profession. Publications of the American College of Pediatricians, which has some 200 members, have been roundly attacked by leading scientific authorities who say they are baseless and accuse the college of distorting and misrepresenting their work. Elsewhere, according to AMERICAblog, Knight, while working at the FRC, claimed that “[t]here is a strong current of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture. … [T]hey want to promote a promiscuous society.” AMERICAblog also reported that then-FRC official Yvette Cantu, in an interview published on Americans for Truth About Homosexuality’s website, said, “If they [gays and lesbians] had children, what would happen when they were too busy having their sex parties?” More recently, in March 2008, Sprigg, responding to a question about uniting gay partners during the immigration process, said: “I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them.” He later apologized, but then went on, last February, to tell MSNBC host Chris Matthews, “I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions on homosexual behavior.” “So we should outlaw gay behavior?” Matthews asked. “Yes,” Sprigg replied. At around the same time, Sprigg claimed that allowing gay people to serve openly in the military would lead to an increase in gay-on-straight sexual assaults. Brody also stated this morning: “What Ted Cruz did last night, talking about our rights come from God not government, Mitt Romney used that exact line in Irwin Pennsylvania and had — and I counted it — a 17-second standing ovation. Bigger than Obamacare, bigger than anything else.” And Brody admitted Republican Senatorial nominee Ted Cruz used “code language” to appeal to religious voters, like, “the great awakening,” and agreed the former President George W. Bush also used the idea that rights come from God not from government. “We hear about this all the time in those Tea Party and Evangelical circles, I call them the Teavangelical circles, you know, the great awakening, very much a spiritual reference to our nation’s history,” Brody said, talking about his book. “I talk about how our rights come from God, not government,” Brody added. 10 days ago, The New Civil Rights Movement reported on a new poll that found while “Democrats came in with 68% support for same-sex marriage, Independents with 57%, and Republicans with only 30%, a mere 6% of Tea Party members said they support same-sex marriage. No other group was close to that low support level.” |
||||||
| |||||||
Log in 
