Juan_Bottom wrote: thegreekdog wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:I admit I laughed cause you're so angry.
But for a fourth time: THE CBO ANALYSIS AND WHATNOT DON'T MATTER ONE LICK BECAUSE THE CONTENT OF THE SEQUESTER HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY POINT AT ALL. You quoted me saying that, but why don't you understand it?
Juan_Bottom wrote:completely comfortable with saying that I cannot prove that Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor are trying to destroy public trust, but I can point to a string of evidence which is currently being dissected and accepted by free thinkers of both parties. My last write-up about it has over 20,000 shares on Facebook.
thegreekdog wrote:Good. Stop fucking talking about your cool shit and give it to me. Stop whining. I asked for this string of evidence two pages ago. Where is it? Democratic Underground hasn't written it yet? Until then, you won't get a cookie for having 20,000 shares on Facebook.
Symmetry wrote:Oh dear, another TGD rant about how everyone is stupid and/or trolling him.
My thoughts are that it took you like 11 pages to stop arguing about the content of the Sequester and to ask what the f*ck your opponent (me) was actually talking about. All the while your opponent (me) had to repeat in every post that he was never talking about the content of the Sequester.
I understand that the Liberals on tv are probably talking about content, and so when a liberal who is not on tv even mentions the Sequester you robotic-ly go into "you stupid Liberals don't understand the Sequester's content" mode without listening. Even after you [rudely] asked what I was talking about, you followed it up with more inane arguments about the content of the Sequester. Even in the same post....>
Well, there's conspiracy and there's fact. This is the same go round we always have. I've provided you with information, namely that the sequestration was, at least partially or mostly, the fault of the president. Further, I've provided you with how the budget gets allocated and that any cuts that you whine about above are the fault of the president. Even further, I've provided you with the specific dollar amounts associated with each cut for the first year of the cuts. I've provided all that information to you to show you that (1) the sequestration isn't bad; (2) it was not something cooked up by Cantor and Ryan to screw the country (which you still haven't explained; and (3) it was mostly the fault of your savior and our current president. .
Seriously? I gave you the fucking GAO analysis! I mean, you must be trolling, right? Just send me a pm and tell me you're trolling. I won't tell anyone.
Honestly I'm at a loss as to how to even explain it to you. You don't believe that politicians ever tell the truth, and you're always arguing about things I'm not talking about. Any idiot
could connect the dots between the Ayn Rand/Laissez-Faire
politician Paul Ryan and his desire to shrink our government through whatever legal means he can find, including shaking the people's faith in it. Cantor and Ryan were behind the Sequester, which cut out a fair amount of government spending and hurt the bureaucracy, but you respond to that by saying "you're delusional. Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan don't want to cut anything." They just friggin' did, helloooooo, it's called the SEQUESTER
. All I ever tried to say was that "they're trying to destroy the public trust in the Federal Government." Which I believe even NS, for all of our disagreements, can see for himself. And look at all these pages of arguments you've laid out that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my point, whatsoever. And I never said they were "trying to screw the country." I don't question their integrity; they really think that they are doing the best thing for everyone. I'm questioning their intelligence and allegiance. And no, the Obama Administration is not behind the Sequester. (I know you can't believe this) If they had their way, the money would be put back, at least into the Socialist programs.
And Sym is right too. I'm arguing UP HERE
and you're arguing down here
...... so you try to drag me down by claiming I'm stupid and trolling. You do it all the time.
Sigh, you're right. You are arguing something and I have no idea what it is that you're arguing. On the one hand, you're not talking about the sequester and, if you were talking about the sequester, which you're not, you're arguing it was a plot or plan by Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan to destroy trust in the federal government, and not on account of anything the president did.
So, I ask again, for the third time, please provide to me your sources so that I can better understand your argument.
My argument, again, is that Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor do not want to cut spending. And as I've indicated in this thread, and in other, similar threads, most Republicans, including Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor, do not want to cut spending for specific things, like, for example, the military. Ryan and Cantor may want to cut spending to after school programs, but, as was demonstrated in other threads, cuts to things like that alone will not balance the budget deficit.
My response to your argument that Cantor and Ryan are trying to destroy trust in the federal government is that long before the first quarter of 2013, Congressional approval was at all-time lows. Long before Cantor and Ryan came to prominence, Congressional approval was at all-time lows. So, until I understand the sources you are using to determine your point, I cannot make any other argument than that. And that is why I think you're trolling me. It's as if you are saying X and when I ask you to show your sources for X, you go on some tangent about how you're awesome, I'm arguing down here, etc. I've asked you for some help understanding your argument and you've yet to provide it.
Further, the sequester doesn't actually cut spending, as I've demonstrated through the use of GAO data. The sequester slows the increase of spending.
You've indicated on multiple occasions, including in the quoted post above, that the sequester was not the president's fault (despite that you're not discussing the sequester apparently). As I've demonstrated (complete with links to websites and quotes), it was at least partially the president's fault. You've not demonstrated that it was not the president's fault EXCEPT through some analysis you've indicated you have, but I'm not intelligent enough to understand.
You have yet to refute any of these points and until now have not addressed them in any serious way. Your argument in the post above is that "any idiot" could connect the dots between Cantor/Ryan and their views on the federal government. And that would be a great argument except it's not supported by any data whatsoever.
In sum, you've addressed the sequester (many times), you've mentioned the Cantor/Ryan connection and blaming the sequester on them and not on the president, and the entirety of your argument (at least right now) consists of what you believe is a novel position that the Republican Party (led by Cantor and Ryan) is trying to erode the public trust in the federal government. None of this is supported in any way by any links to third party sources or data.
In sum, my response is that the sequester can be blamed on Congress and the president collectively, that the sequester was not a cut in spending, it was a cut in the planned increase of spending, that Cantor/Ryan and most Republicans do not want to sufficiently cut spending, and that the public trust in the federal government was eroded long before you came up with this idea that Cantor and Ryan are trying to erode that public trust. All of this is supported by links to third party sources and data.
But let's use some common sense for a second. If Cantor and Ryan want to erode public trust in the federal government through the sequester, and if any idiot could see that they wanted to do that, why would the president permit the sequester by signing the bill into law in the first place? Further, if the president could see what Cantor and Ryan are trying to do, why would he go on a world tour and allows his representatives to speak out regarding the disaster that would befall the federal government if the sequester happened? Why would the president make a show of closing the White House to tours as a sign of the horrible sequester? Is Obama in on the conspiracy?