Republicans Can't Handle The Truth


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Republicans Can't Handle The Truth

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next
Author Message
BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,179,533
RAC: 4,526
United States
Message 1304235 - Posted: 9 Nov 2012, 22:58:32 UTC - in response to Message 1304233.

Skil -- the Teapublican party is not irrelevant -- as long as they hold a majority in the House, plus a blocking minority in the Senate they can do a great deal of damage. Further, as long as Teapubublicans hold majorities in state houses along with governorships, they can create state level laws that reflect their right wing views and values.

If they remain true to their right wing, ethnocentric ideology long enough, I suspect the electorate will eventually respond appropriately at all levels (assuming that while in power the Teapublicans don't significantly further restrict the franchise).

At that point a center/right party to balance the center/left (or more accurately centrist) Democratic party might well emerge. (Folks calling the Democrats leftist or socialist are pretty much blinded by the rhetoric of the Teapublican right wing ideologues).


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,343,935
RAC: 190,509
Message 1304255 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 1:31:15 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 17:04:12 UTC

--

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2384
Credit: 5,024,965
RAC: 10,418
United States
Message 1304256 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 1:42:03 UTC - in response to Message 1304255.

Guy, you are no longer a tea person and now a radical libertarian?
____________

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,463,938
RAC: 1,745
United States
Message 1304260 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 2:06:20 UTC - in response to Message 1304255.

Boner (Boner... ha ha) and McConnel need to compromise and allow NO cuts to social programs.


Kirk Cameron played Mikey Seaver in "Growing Pains". That was the name of his best pal in that series.
And we all know what Kirk is doing now, right?
Starring in movie versions of the "Left Behind" series.

Terror Australis
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1715
Credit: 205,106,490
RAC: 27,120
Australia
Message 1304280 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 3:56:43 UTC - in response to Message 1304255.
Last modified: 10 Nov 2012, 4:22:19 UTC

Guy, while I detect a note of sarcasm in your post whether you realise it or not you are on the right (as in correct) track.

I've rearranged your list slightly to show where you have hit the nail on the head

Freedom in reproductive rights.
Freedom in marriage rights.
Freedom from religion rights.
Freedom in citizenship rights.
Freedom in health care rights.

Tick to all of the above

Freedom in housing, food,.....

Tick to these, they are two of the basic necessities of life

.... TV, heat, air conditioning, telephone, car, and X-Box rights.

In modern societies, possibly a car and a telephone count as necessities (but not "rights"). How can a person find a job if they cannot be contacted or do not have the ability to get to the workplace ? Unless you live in a Big City public transport is almost non-existant. "Heat and Air Conditioning", could be counted as necessities depending on where you live. Heating particularly.

Freedom in marijuana/cocaine/crystal meth amphetamine rights.

To this list you should have added alcohol. Once again this is not a "right" but is certainly a "freedom".

The unofficial Fourth Necessity of life is some way to "step out of it" for a while. Just about every species has its own intoxicant, cats have catnip; elephants, birds and other species go for various types of over ripe fruit which has naturally fermented and so on.

While I don't condone or encourage the use of powders I see no problem with marijuana.

Besides, how much money could the US government save if the DEA was wound back ?

Freedom in viagra rights.
Freedom in pizza and beer rights.
Freedom in NFL rights.

This is where the sarcasm comes in, but I guess we can't expect a total over night conversion :-)

There are other comments on your post I could make, particularly regarding what should be covered by health care and the "Free Market" but they are subjects for another thread.

T.A.

(minor edits for spelling and clarity)

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1304281 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 3:58:25 UTC - in response to Message 1304280.

not necessarily a car as a necessity but some means of transportation
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Reed Young
Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 06
Posts: 122
Credit: 81,383
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1304286 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 4:26:22 UTC - in response to Message 1304232.

McConnell's flunky asserts that the CRS pulled the report on their own, so you just take him at his word. And you wonder how it's so obvious that you're just a Republican by another name. Snort that!

Don Stewart, a spokesman for the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said Mr. McConnell and other senators “raised concerns about the methodology and other flaws.” Mr. Stewart added that people outside of Congress had also criticized the study and that officials at the research service “decided, on their own, to pull the study pending further review.”

Sure they did, and applied no indirect or off-the-record pressure, I'm sure. Do you know the word "gullible" isn't on dictionary.com?

On the contrary, as Senate minority leader, McConnell's blatant attempt to deny facts and to suppress professional, reputable and non-partisan analysis merely because it does not comport with his policy preferences, calls for denunciation by all credible members of his party

Snort
officials at the research service “decided, on their own, to pull the study pending further review.”

From a link in your own post.

Yes, but it's just an assertion by an assistant to the perpetrator of the wrongdoing which is the subject of the article, an assertion which intelligent readers know is not a fact but a denial of a fact.
____________

Reed Young
Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 06
Posts: 122
Credit: 81,383
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1304291 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 4:37:29 UTC - in response to Message 1304235.

Skil -- the Teapublican party is not irrelevant -- as long as they hold a majority in the House, plus a blocking minority in the Senate they can do a great deal of damage.

They can do nothing more than get in the way. At the beginning of the session, Senate rules can be revised without a supermajority, just with a simple majority, so Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer (chair or whatever of the Senate Rules Committee) do have the option to alter or eliminate the filibuster, in any case neutering Senate Teabaglicans as they should have done at the beginning of the previous two-year session. The Teabaglicans still have an outright majority in the House due to gerrymandering, and continuing their obstruction until the mid-term election could do a great deal of damage, as you say. But they very well might have leverage in only the House, and none in the Senate.

Reed Young
Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 06
Posts: 122
Credit: 81,383
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1304293 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 4:40:46 UTC - in response to Message 1304260.

Boner (Boner... ha ha) and McConnel need to compromise and allow NO cuts to social programs.


Kirk Cameron played Mikey Seaver in "Growing Pains". That was the name of his best pal in that series.
And we all know what Kirk is doing now, right?
Starring in movie versions of the "Left Behind" series.

Maybe everybody else knew that, but last I saw Kirk he was propmaster / straight man to Roy "Bananaman" Comfort, in YouTube videos. Good to know that his "career" has continued to plummet from there.
____________

Reed Young
Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 06
Posts: 122
Credit: 81,383
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1304296 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 4:48:49 UTC - in response to Message 1304229.

I have given money to candidates to the party I belong to. I did vote for their standard bearer for President. HINT it wasn't Romney.

So you voted for Gary Johnson, big deal. Libertarians and Republicans are not as different as you seem to like to imagine.
____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8644
Credit: 24,373,837
RAC: 25,851
United Kingdom
Message 1304302 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 5:08:58 UTC - in response to Message 1304280.

Freedom in marijuana/cocaine/crystal meth amphetamine rights.

To this list you should have added alcohol. Once again this is not a "right" but is certainly a "freedom".

The unofficial Fourth Necessity of life is some way to "step out of it" for a while. Just about every species has its own intoxicant, cats have catnip; elephants, birds and other species go for various types of over ripe fruit which has naturally fermented and so on.

While I don't condone or encourage the use of powders I see no problem with marijuana.

Besides, how much money could the US government save if the DEA was wound back ?


How about making them legal, but at the same time taxing them, at a rate that covers the state/federal costs for the troubles and health issues they cause. Also ban all advertising on them.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,179,533
RAC: 4,526
United States
Message 1304310 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 6:01:08 UTC - in response to Message 1304291.

Reed, fair points there. The Democrats have leverage at the outset -- if nothing happens, taxes revert to the 'onerous' Clinton era taxes (I note our economy and the extremely wealthy were doing just fine then), defense spending drops back to the level in place in 2009 -- something like 70% higher than in 2001, and other spending also is cut. By and large, that is closer to what the Democrats would wish than what the Teapublicans would wish.

But then, early next year, the Teapublicans can shut down government and damage US credit ratings again simply by not authorizing a debt ceiling increase.

My view is that the key player in the House is not Boehner or Cantor -- Boehner is weak and not respected by his own party, Cantor is so self oriented that even Teapublicans can sense that. Rather the key player is Ryan. I believe (and I could be wrong her clearly) that for all his ideological views, that Ryan is a 'country first' sort of player. He also has true leverage with the Teapublicans. Further, he might figure out that by making a big deal with Obama (which would include some tax increases, some entitlement cuts and other budget cuts as well) that he would position himself for a run for President in 2016.



They can do nothing more than get in the way. At the beginning of the session, Senate rules can be revised without a supermajority, just with a simple majority, so Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer (chair or whatever of the Senate Rules Committee) do have the option to alter or eliminate the filibuster, in any case neutering Senate Teabaglicans as they should have done at the beginning of the previous two-year session. The Teabaglicans still have an outright majority in the House due to gerrymandering, and continuing their obstruction until the mid-term election could do a great deal of damage, as you say. But they very well might have leverage in only the House, and none in the Senate.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,179,533
RAC: 4,526
United States
Message 1304311 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 6:03:19 UTC - in response to Message 1304296.

Reed, there is a big difference between true libertarians and Teapublicans -- social issues.



So you voted for Gary Johnson, big deal. Libertarians and Republicans are not as different as you seem to like to imagine.

Terror Australis
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1715
Credit: 205,106,490
RAC: 27,120
Australia
Message 1304328 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 7:40:33 UTC - in response to Message 1304302.

How about making them legal, but at the same time taxing them, at a rate that covers the state/federal costs for the troubles and health issues they cause. Also ban all advertising on them.

+1

T.A.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12569
Credit: 6,878,895
RAC: 6,750
United States
Message 1304431 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 12:26:09 UTC - in response to Message 1304311.

How many republicans are pro abortion?
How many republicans are for legalization of drugs?
How many republicans are for legal porn?

Reed I'm beginning to think you are intentionally insulting.

Reed, there is a big difference between true libertarians and Teapublicans -- social issues.



So you voted for Gary Johnson, big deal. Libertarians and Republicans are not as different as you seem to like to imagine.



____________


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,343,935
RAC: 190,509
Message 1304465 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 14:15:06 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 17:02:52 UTC

--

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8644
Credit: 24,373,837
RAC: 25,851
United Kingdom
Message 1304476 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 14:36:25 UTC

The American people spoke last Tuesday night and the American people voted for "fundamental change."


Did they?

The popular vote was almost equal for both sides. The problem you are noting is the indirect way the President is chosen.

And if he and a couple of others in the Republican party had not voiced some stupid comments it could have easily ended up the other way.

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,829,937
RAC: 2,899
United States
Message 1304513 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 15:45:56 UTC - in response to Message 1304465.

Guy, while I detect a note of sarcasm in your post whether you realise it or not you are on the right (as in correct) track.

Terror, yes, I am now on the correct track. The American people spoke last Tuesday night and the American people voted for "fundamental change." The "fundamental change" they voted for is to flip from "limited government/individual take care of yourself" to a total government responsibility to ensure equality of outcome.


Oh my, I'm not sure I saw any party campaign for "equality of outcome". This appears to be the same old Tea Party lie about Obama being a socialist. Have you really changed?

The "limited government/take care of yourself" has failed because some can do it and some cannot. If you look at the demographics, it LOOKS very racist; therefore, it must be wrong. I believe it's wrong now.


Yes, the demographics indicated racism may have played a part, the Democratic Party won an overwhelming majority of black (93%), hispanic (71%) and asian (73%) votes. It seems clear these voters did not feel welcomed by the Republican Party.

The terms freedoms and rights are now used interchangeably. A freedom is a right and a right is a freedom. There is no more difference in their meanings. We've progressed enough to realize those are the same things.


They are? By whom?

Happiness comes from freedom and rights. Whether it's the right to free speech or the freedom to travel unhindered, they are both basic requirements for natural happiness. Whether it's the freedom to drink beer, eat pizza and watch an NFL game or the right to take viagra afterwards to counteract the effects of the beer in order to do some frolicking, if people don't have these rights/freedoms, the government is not holding up to its responsibility.


The country was founded on the belief of unalienable rights, including the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It's now time for those who CAN do it to provide for those who CAN'T do it. It's only fair. And in order for it to FEEL good, the white guy must suffer at least a little bit in order to demonstrate that social justice is being accomplished. Fair is fair. This is something we all learned in grade school and it applies to adults just as much. The white guy must be pinged with the dodge ball a few times in order to make the last person picked for the team feel better and get on to a better life.

America has changed... FUNDAMENTALLY. That's how a progressive democracy works.


The "white guy" has always been a minority in the US, in the past he thought he wasn't, on Wednesday he woke up realizing his false belief was no longer sustainable. The "white guy" now either works with the majority or is ignored.

Oh, and in case anybody thinks that the Republican majority in the House will hold for much longer, the writing is already on the wall, nationally, the Republicans lost the popular vote for the House ("53,952,240 votes were cast for a Democratic candidate for the House and only 53,402,643 were cast for a Republican", source). The allocation of seats, was to a large part, based on the gerrymandering of districts, in time this will change.

The Republican Party was founded to put an end to slavery, it's job is done.
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,829,937
RAC: 2,899
United States
Message 1304515 - Posted: 10 Nov 2012, 15:47:44 UTC - in response to Message 1304476.
Last modified: 10 Nov 2012, 15:55:10 UTC

The American people spoke last Tuesday night and the American people voted for "fundamental change."


Did they?

The popular vote was almost equal for both sides. The problem you are noting is the indirect way the President is chosen.

And if he and a couple of others in the Republican party had not voiced some stupid comments it could have easily ended up the other way.


Before you ask the US to remove the splinter from its eye, could you answer the question, when was the last time the majority party in the UK parliament won 50% of the popular vote?

[ETA]I'm old enough to remember when the majority party in parliament won a smaller share of the popular vote (1974) than the minority party (like the Republicans did this year), others here may be old enough to remember two occasions where that happened in the UK (it also happened in 1951).[/ETA]
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Republicans Can't Handle The Truth

Copyright © 2014 University of California