Big Mo, kentuck, being jointly stupid

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028129209

Oh my.

kentuck (76,388 posts)  Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:23 PM

Thirty years of "Democratic policies" have destroyed our inner cities?
 
This is the argument-du-jour of the Republicans. It is the Democrats that are totally to blame for the problems in our inner cities. No doubt, Democrats shoulder some of the blame.

However, we should not overlook the fact how Governors like Jindal in Louisiana, Walker in Wisconsin, and Brownback in Kansas, and others, have affected the standard of education and living in their states, including their inner cities.

When the tax base disappears, when companies move to other states with lower wages or to other countries, when legislatures pass right-to-work laws, when they cut the social safety nets from under poor people, there are consequences.

And these acts have not been perpetrated by Democrats alone. Republicans cannot escape some responsibility for the conditions of our inner cities and the ensuing social problems that followed.

If we wish to be honest, we would have to admit that this decline began with the Reagan Revolution, with the huge tax cuts, the huge defiicits, and tales of welfare recipients picking up their checks in their Cadillacs.

This lie needs to cease.

Wellstone ruled (6,825 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:25 PM

1. Just another GOP
 
false equivalency,supported by bogus facts. 

no_hypocrisy (27,023 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:28 PM

2. After Carter, there was a drastic cut to urban renewal.
 
Reagan cut federal spending programs by shifting the cost to state and local governments. State and local governments couldn't raise taxes to make up for the deficits of federal dollars. Cities went neglected and sparse resources had to be shifted and reallocated just to balance the budge (if they were lucky).

<<<wasn't aware Reagan had so much power.

<<<remembers how Reagan actually had to share power with Vast Teddy and Tipsy O'Neill.

mopinko (45,965 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:30 PM

3. rauner in illinois and rethugs before him in springfield
 
have been whittling away at education here for decades.

the state constitution says the state must pay "the majority" of school funding. but somehow that was interpreted to mean just the most, and not 50%+1.

federal dollars used to make up the difference for many poor school districts, but we know how things have been in d.c. for a couple decades.

rauner will join the former governors in prison, if there is any justice in the world. 

<<<thinks Big Mo needs to mellow out.

<<<finally figured out the enigma of Big Mo's former husband.

We all remember Big Mo's former husband, the poor guy who broke his back doting on her, spoiling her, trying to please her, giving her everything she wanted, keeping her the begin-all and end-all of his existence.

One always wondered why.

Then, like Saul on the Road to Damascus, it came to me as if a blinding light in the middle of the night (I'd been sleeping)--despite appearances, Big Mo must be pretty damned good in bed, and the guy was simply willing to pay any price, including his own dignity, just for a good ****.

JI7 (56,550 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:33 PM

4. after blacks gained legal civil rights the conservatives begin to oppose
 
govt supported programs which would help blacks the way it did whites before.

If we had a media more like many foreign countries these things would be discussed . But instead many tv "reporters" are more like reality show types who would rather do lazy crap like bringing up robert byrd.

yardwork (42,035 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:40 PM

5. The Republicans were saying that 30 years ago.
 
I remember George H. W. Bush saying that "30 years of liberal policies" were the reason for the Rodney King riots. 

They weren't?

Warpy (89,120 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 04:15 PM

6. They don't say that to me any more
 
because I pin them down as to which policies and then point out which party has been in control (sometimes in control of all 3 branches of government) and has done absolutely nothing about these supposedly odious liberal policies.

At some point, doing nothing becomes an act in itself for which a person or party in control is fully responsible.

It's hilarious that they keep blaming liberals. Liberals went out of power in 1969,* nearly 50 years ago. Conservatives in both parties have run the whole shebang during that time. One wonders how long ruinous policies have to be maintained before a conservative will admit failure. My guess is perpetuity.

*sic

muntrv (10,163 posts)    Sun Aug 28, 2016, 04:48 PM

7. 6 years of Rick Snyder led to Flint water poisoning.

Hasn't that water been poisoned a lot longer than that?

[Carl]

The lies leftists must tell themselves.

[SVPete]

Hasn't that water been poisoned a lot longer than that?

The lead has been in the pipes - specifically the solder holding the pipes together (if I understand correctly) for decades. Flint's city government switched to a water supplier whose water was a bit more acidic, and leached lead out of the pipe system. While Gov. Snyder appointed the person to oversee Flint's operation in bankruptcy and is nominally in charge of MI's enviro-agency, envirocrats are all but unaccountable, and it was D city MISgovernance that got Flint into bankruptcy and in desperate need to cut costs.

[SVPete]

Typical Prog-"think": Every problem should be solved by throwing money at it. They cannot think outside of a government-dependency box.

But even if that is stipulated for the sake of discussion, why are these Prog-governed urban paradises so dependent on state and Federal $$ (and didn't the Feds start getting into funding local schools in a big way as recently as the 70S?)? Why are such Paradises generating more economic activity and taxes than the cities and schools know how to spend?

[USA4ME]

Democratic controlled cities had been ratholes years before Reagan came along.

I would think the proof that Republicans are wrong on this would be one of the primitives pointing out several (let's start with just ONE) Democrat controlled cities where things have greatly improved in the inner city. Com'n, what better evidence could there be that we're wrong about Democrats destroying the inner city that to provide examples where just the opposite has happened?

But not a single person on that thread gives a viable attempt to do that. One person mentioned the cities of San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, and Denver having improved their inner cities, but go to those cities and into the minority areas and ask them how much better things have gotten. They'll tell you they haven't.

But the good thing is the same minorities who live in the slums will vote for the very same Democrats who will *keep* them in the slums, so they have that going for them.

.

[SVPete]

Democratic controlled cities had been ratholes years before Reagan came along.

I would think the proof that Republicans are wrong on this would be one of the primitives pointing out several (let's start with just ONE) Democrat controlled cities where things have greatly improved in the inner city. Com'n, what better evidence could there be that we're wrong about Democrats destroying the inner city that to provide examples where just the opposite has happened?

But not a single person on that thread gives a viable attempt to do that. One person mentioned the cities of San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, and Denver having improved their inner cities, but go to those cities and into the minority areas and ask them how much better things have gotten. They'll tell you they haven't.

But the good thing is the same minorities who live in the slums will vote for the very same Democrats who will *keep* them in the slums, so they have that going for them.

.

I can't speak to Seattle, Portland, or Denver - lack of knowledge/experience. SF's Hunter's Point is as sketchy as ever, and the Tenderloin is as bad as ever. I walked through the 'loin several times a couple of years ago going to a foreign consulate on Cathedral Hill, and, yeah ... . As for Hunter's Point, it probably would be unsafe for me to walk around that neighborhood at pretty much any hour of any day. I've also in the recent past driven through Sacto's Oak Park neighborhood (scene of a 1960s race riot). It's not as much a hellhole as Hunter's Point, but I'll just say that I left by a different route.

[FiddyBeowulf]

But not a single person on that thread gives a viable attempt to do that. One person mentioned the cities of San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, and Denver having improved their inner cities, but go to those cities and into the minority areas and ask them how much better things have gotten. They'll tell you they haven't.

They have gotten better by making it too expensive for the poor to live there anymore.

[FunkyZero]

Isn't it sick how the actual problem totally escapes them? And of course, I'm talking about the destruction of the family structure of those... EHEM,  "inner city" folks.
Apparently, we need to shovel more money into those schools. That will surely make the "inner city" kids want to stay in school and do well, right?
Geez... the total lack of logic is astounding.
Also no mention of the REAL reason companies flee liberal cities... they can't afford the damned taxes extracted from them for said failing social programs. Hell, don't even mention the inefficient and overpriced union labor. There is but ONE reason auto manufacturers fled the golden city of Detroit. They would be already be broke and gone if they hadn't.

[98ZJUSMC]

Isn't it sick how the actual problem totally escapes them? And of course, I'm talking about the destruction of the family structure of those... EHEM,  "inner city" folks.
Apparently, we need to shovel more money into those schools. That will surely make the "inner city" kids want to stay in school and do well, right?
Geez... the total lack of logic is astounding.
Also no mention of the REAL reason companies flee liberal cities... they can't afford the damned taxes extracted from them for said failing social programs. Hell, don't even mention the inefficient and overpriced union labor. There is but ONE reason auto manufacturers fled the golden city of Detroit. They would be already be broke and gone if they hadn't.

To admit the problem would completely destroy the carefully crafted worldview they have built for themselves.

[SVPete]

A couple of addenda re SF:

* The city government area could be pleasant enough, but for the homeless people sleeping it off in the AM and panhandling later in the day;

* The "South of Market (Street)" area has been improved, though government got involved largely because that was the "price" of keeping the Giants in SF.

[I_B_Perky]

OK ken****... I'll play:

kentuck (76,388 posts)  Sun Aug 28, 2016, 03:23 PM

1. Thirty years of "Democratic policies" have destroyed our inner cities?
 
2. This is the argument-du-jour of the Republicans. It is the Democrats that are totally to blame for the problems in our inner cities. No doubt, Democrats shoulder some of the blame.

3. However, we should not overlook the fact how Governors like Jindal in Louisiana, Walker in Wisconsin, and Brownback in Kansas, and others, have affected the standard of education and living in their states, including their inner cities.

4. When the tax base disappears, when companies move to other states with lower wages or to other countries, when legislatures pass right-to-work laws, when they cut the social safety nets from under poor people, there are consequences.

5. And these acts have not been perpetrated by Democrats alone. Republicans cannot escape some responsibility for the conditions of our inner cities and the ensuing social problems that followed.

6. If we wish to be honest, we would have to admit that this decline began with the Reagan Revolution, with the huge tax cuts, the huge defiicits, and tales of welfare recipients picking up their checks in their Cadillacs.

This lie needs to cease.

In order ken****:

1. More than 30 years. You cannot blame it on any other party.

2. dems shoulder 110 percent of the blame. I know it and so do you. Spin don't work.

3.  I have yet to see any governor list of states that contain cities such as Detroit, Trenton, etc.  Education? Ha!!! That is typically a local issue, not a state issue... except when the all powerful fed government in DC that you support steps in.

4. When the tax base disappears is usually because of dem mayors turning their cities into crime rife shitholes.  People do not like to live in, or raise a family, in crime rife shitholes so guess what?  They move!!!  When companies move to other states/countries?  Unions ken****?  Priced themselves, and their companies, out of the market.  Not to mention the taxes these shithole creating mayors levy on them.  Why wouldn't they move some where else?   Cutting the safety net?  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  One trillion a year is the current guesstimate that the US spends on welfare.  In other words, kentuck you dumb****, WE DO NOT KNOW how much we spend on welfare.  That right there is a red flag.  The only consequence is giving money to people that will not get off their ass and get a job. 

5. These acts were done entirely by the democratic mayor and city councils.  Not a GOP in sight. 

6. If you want to talk about being honest, then put the blame where the blame lies. At your socialist dems city policies.

6. Who am I going to believe on this ken**** you dumb****?  You or my lying eyes at the grocery store?  As for huge deficits? Do you really want to go there, you dumb****?  I implore you to come over here and try.  I will ask everyone here to refrain from posting in the thread. It will be just you and me.  Man to dummie.  So punk... what are you waiting for?  Come here and educate my hillbilly ass. 

I will not hold my breath for the simple reason I have a brain and you are a fact bereft, mentally retarded dummie.

So in closing I have one thing to say to you:

Why don't you go off yourself ASAP.