Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:Sure they do, just like "those are our jets now."

Yes tell me more about what I think. It's cute every time one of you on here does that. 

Quote:Yes tell me more about what I think. It's cute every time one of you on here does that. 

 

I could've sworn you were speaking for "most" progressives. Maybe you don't know as much about what they think as you think you do.

Quote:I could've sworn you were speaking for "most" progressives. Maybe you don't know as much about what they think as you think you do.

You really don't see the hypocrisy in this? You're basically stereo typing in order to ensure your position cannot be questioned.

Quote:You really don't see the hypocrisy in this? You're basically stereo typing in order to ensure your position cannot be questioned.

No he does not he never does. 

Quote:I could've sworn you were speaking for "most" progressives. Maybe you don't know as much about what they think as you think you do.

I did say that and I am also correct because that is a basic tenet of progressive policies. So what exactly is your stance here? That those in the progressive circles that say exactly what I am saying they say is not what they are saying? 

Quote:I did say that and I am also correct because that is a basic tenet of progressive policies. So what exactly is your stance here? That those in the progressive circles that say exactly what I am saying they say is not what they are saying?

I'm saying that they want Conservative money out of politics. That's why your lapdog media has a Koch problem but Soros is a non-entity. It's not that complicated.

Quote:And all that influence is a problem. Most progressives do think this way already. 

I disagree.  Progressives have no problem when the right people donate to the right causes.  The same with conservatives to be fair.

Quote:I disagree. Progressives have no problem when the right people donate to the right causes. The same with conservatives to be fair.

I simply dont thing thats the case. I'm sure there are progressives that dont care about that just like there are conservatives that have zero intention of decreasing the scope of federal government. However, the majority want all money out of it. They believe its the best way to return the political process to the people.

Quote:I'm saying that they want Conservative money out of politics. That's why your lapdog media has a Koch problem but Soros is a non-entity. It's not that complicated.

The non fox media isn't progressive. The champions of the progress cause, warren and sanders, both back the removal of all money from politics. Its easy to see, not sure why you are arguing this point. If you remove the Kochs you remove the Soros'. Its literally impossible to to do one and not the other unless you have an example bow that could possibly happen.

Quote:The non fox media isn't progressive. The champions of the progress cause, warren and sanders, both back the removal of all money from politics. Its easy to see, not sure why you are arguing this point. If you remove the Kochs you remove the Soros'. Its literally impossible to to do one and not the other unless you have an example bow that could possibly happen.

 

You don't really believe this, you have to pulling my leg.

Quote:You don't really believe this, you have to pulling my leg.

 

Which part is unbelievable? The only reason I am personally ok with Soros' political contributions is because something must be done to balance the Koch brothers' influence.

Quote:You don't really believe this, you have to pulling my leg.

Which part? The fact that liberal media isn't progressive in the eyes of progressive? The fact that Warren and Sanders are the champions for progressive causes and support what I stated? The fact that it's impossible to remove the Kochs is to also remove the Soros'. The fact that IMO, most progressives do want that to happen? 

Quote:Which part? The fact that liberal media isn't progressive in the eyes of progressive? The fact that Warren and Sanders are the champions for progressive causes and support what I stated? The fact that it's impossible to remove the Kochs is to also remove the Soros'. The fact that IMO, most progressives do want that to happen? 

I thought Warren and Sanders wanted public funded campaigns that's a little different to me then contribution limits.

Wouldn''t outrageous spending by Super Pacs discourage being responsible with spending for politicians post-election? Spend Spend Spend to get elected.  Spend Spend Spend when you're in office to pay back favors.  Then spend spend spend again to get re-elected.

Quote:Which part? The fact that liberal media isn't progressive in the eyes of progressive? The fact that Warren and Sanders are the champions for progressive causes and support what I stated? The fact that it's impossible to remove the Kochs is to also remove the Soros'. The fact that IMO, most progressives do want that to happen? 

 

Yes.

Quote:The non fox media isn't progressive. The champions of the progress cause, warren and sanders, both back the removal of all money from politics. Its easy to see, not sure why you are arguing this point. If you remove the Kochs you remove the Soros'. Its literally impossible to to do one and not the other unless you have an example bow that could possibly happen.

Truth!


It's actually not an evil progressive point of view. Most Americans feel this way too!!

Quote:Yes.

Lol, care to expand on your thoughts?


I like you flsprtsgod, but sometimes you drive me batty when you don't elaborate or provide a counter argument!


By the way, Eric, I think I might have time tonight to watch more of the austrian video.

Quote:I thought Warren and Sanders wanted public funded campaigns that's a little different to me then contribution limits.

That I think would be ideal... and I think I have heard Bernie day something to that. Not sure about Warren.


But the main mantra is, money is not speech, corporations are not people. The fight I mainly here from Bernie is to amend the Constitution to clarify this point to counter the horror that is Citizens United.

Quote:Truth!


It's actually not an evil progressive point of view. Most Americans feel this way too!!

I've never understood why 'progressive' was evil (unless we're talking the car insurance, in which case Flo is the Antichrist incarnate)  Isn't progressive the idea that we should make... progress.  I'd imagine most people like progress.  I guess some people want to keep the status quo. Mr. Rogers was a progressive for example, and I wouldn't consider him evil.  

Quote:That I think would be ideal... and I think I have heard Bernie day something to that. Not sure about Warren.


But the main mantra is, money is not speech, corporations are not people. The fight I mainly here from Bernie is to amend the Constitution to clarify this point to counter the horror that is Citizens United.

 

But then the only way to have a campaign would be public financing. Which leads to the problem of who decides who get's public money to run a campaign and who doesn't? You'd be asking the state for permission to run a campaign to be part of the state, essentially reformers would never get approved to run a campaign to reform the state.

 

Now I think a more realistic solution would be some kind of limit on what campaigns can spend but using public money to run the elections is a quick road to a banana republic.