|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
http://www.jamesriverjournal.com/liberta...s-3rd-term.htmlRepublicans, Why All the Hate? Obama is Completing Bush's 3rd Term Written by James Quigley It’s not hard to figure out the Left in their love for Obama. He’s expanding government and centralizing power in Washington DC at a fast rate. What I don’t understand is why they didn’t appreciate Bush more, who created even more Federal agencies and transferred greater power to the executive branch. I also really don’t understand the hatred the Right has for President Obama. He’s simply continuing President Bush’s 3rd Presidential term in office, and he’s proving Noam Chomsky correct in that the difference between Republicans and Democrats is merely an issue of degrees instead of policies. I suppose that the hard right and hard left don’t care as much about policy as they do about their side being in power. Let’s look at the track record. President Bush sent troops to invade two countries in the Middle East: Afghanistan followed by Iraq. The left went ballistic, going so far as to promote Cindy Sheehan and anti-war groups such as Code Pink and to use their media attention for political advantage. Since President Obama came into office he has pulled some troops out of Iraq, but moved them to build up our presence in Afghanistan. He has talked about military engagements in other countries, promoting the use of enacting a No-Fly Zone in Libya which would require planes, missiles, bombs, and deployment orders for military personnel. So far there has been no significant anti-war movement since Bush left office. On Code Pink’s own website there are discussions of solidarity with Egyptian demonstrators, but no comment about the shooting of civilians that has happened in countries that Obama’s administration subsidizes such as in Iraq (Feb 25) and Bahrain (also in February). Bush created Homeland Security, pushed through the Patriot Act, and then continued the Patriot Act throughout his term. The Department of Homeland Security has expanded through the Obama era, as well as its domestic surveillance arsenal. The TSA is still entrenched, and that pesky Patriot Act was just extended once more. In a side not, Democratic Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi supported the Patriot Act under Republican President George at its inception. The vast majority of newly elected Tea Party Republicans also voted for the newest extension of the Patriot Act, despite Tea Party members worried that the government is using domestic surveillance to monitor them. Under Bush we had the first half of the bailouts and Quantitative Easing. Under Obama, we had the second half of the bailouts and Quantitative Easing 2. Both Bush and Obama have gone to great lengths to protect Chairman Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve. Yes, I know President Obama pushed for the unconstitutional health care bill that subsidizes pharmaceutical companies and mandates citizens to purchase private insurance. Bush passed Medicare Part D, which subsidized prescription drugs and took away the government’s authority to negotiate drug prices, also a taxpayer handout to the pharmaceutical cartel. Both President Bush and President Obama have used taxpayer money to fund faith-based initiatives, though aimed at different constituencies in what critics claim is an attempt to purchase votes and influence. George Bush started Guatanamo Bay as a place to store suspected terrorists and as a place to try to force information out of them. Just this month President Obama declared that Guatanamo Bay will remain open, and that many of the prisoners held there will not be given a trial since there is a lack of evidence to try them in the first place. President Bush’s administration authorized the killing of US citizens without trial, such as Kamal Derwish in Yemen, killed by a hellfire missile back in 2002. President Obama’s administration has stated that it has the authority to assassinate Anwar al-Awlaki without trial due to the state of war the country is in. al-Awlaki is a US citizen who joined a terrorist group, also in Yemen. Amendment Six of the US Constitution states “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” Private Bradley Manning is held here in Virginia, and is being treated with methods used against suspected terrorists in order to create discomfort and humiliation, despite the fact that he leaked classified documents on civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, a crime different from being that of an enemy combatant. President Obama fired P.J. Crowley from his Department of State staff for publicly stating that the treatment of Manning is “ridiculous and counterproductive”. President Obama speaks repeatedly of his support of unions and is suspected to be against free trade because of his nationalization of the auto industry. President Bush wooed the steel industry and steel unions by imposing a steel tariff in 2002. Bush did the same for the car industry and car unions by taking money from TARP and injecting it into the auto companies, a move that had no basis in law and was against the duties given to the executive branch, but went unchallenged by Congress and the media. I’m still puzzled by why those on the right and those on the left despise one another. They support the same statist policies and are lobbied by the same special interest groups. These actions, many of which are against the interests and rights of the US people, will continue until the citizens finally say no and separate themselves from the grip that the political parties have over them. Obama is no different from Bush the younger, who was no different from Clinton, who was no different from Bush the elder, and so on and so forth. This is because our representatives are chosen in our system by a select few, making it so that the citizens vote not for real change, but for a difference of degrees. As Farrakhan realized about Obama, “Before he was elected, he was selected.” In Liberty, James Quigley James Quigley is the Chair of the Peninsula Libertarian Party covering Hampton and Newport News. He is a former active duty military officer with time served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is now serving as a contractor. He has a wife named Nicole and three children: Makenna, Emeline and Thomas. Mr. Quigley was also a 2010 Congressional candidate under the Libertarian ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
For conservatives, having Obama as Bush's 3rd term is not a good thing. For the GOP elitists, they just want their candidate in there pushing the agenda.
I'm ready for a real candidate from the GOP. If they give me another in the line of candidates that they've been producing for the past 20 years or so (I can't decide their candidates for them anymore - I left the GOP quite a while ago), they won't get my vote. If they give me someone I can vote for, they'll have it. Either way, Obama won't get my vote.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998 |
Even though I agree with you that Obama pretty much is carrying on Bush's 3rd term, that doesn't mean that Repubs should like him. Bush's approval ratings were like 25% or somewhere close at the end of his term. Assuming the population is 50/50 of Dems and Repubs, that means only about half of the Repubs approved of him. Through in the fact that Obama has a (D) next to his name, how could you possibly think that the majority of Repubs would support him, when roughly half supported Bush at the end of his term?
Stupid article with a stupid point, IMHO.
Wise words spoken by sages
From SkyTel to BlackBerry pagers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Quote:
Stupid article with a stupid point
i think it brings up a really important trend--and that is the current procession of stooges that we have paraded through the White House in an effort to get America heading in the right direction.
And as long as we vote based on party affiliations and let these idiots nominate the latest stooge--then we are all doomed.
Basically, this country saw its political machinery hijacked by greed and powerful corporate interests decades ago.
And anyone who gets a nomination from either party, is a stooge.
I believe that the only way that this nation gets turned around in any decent direction, is if we get a good amount of concerned citizens* into the seats of Congress and elect a solid libertarian president** who will start the process of returning this country to greatness.
*by concerned citizens--I mean people who genuinely care about the way this country is being run. People who will read everything they vote for. People who are happy enough as they are, and can't be swayed by money or influence. People who will vote based upon what they feel is right, and not along some imaginary "party line." A cross-section of decent people, independent spirits, who aren't in it for some personal agenda.
Currently, we have a bunch of swindlers, and sheisters, and human chancre's of nearly every description conducting our country's affairs.
**Preferably someone who is a strict adherent to the Constitution, and someone who can interact with the international community in a way which embraces a global commitment to solve the problems that plague us all; while simultaneously putting our domestic resurgence at the fore front of American Policy. A leader who is content to let the State's take care of their own business and doesn't feel the need to preside over this huge umbrella of federal bureaucracy. (Also, I say Libertarian, b/c any real libertarian isn't going to seek out new ways to grow new government.)
The system has been sick for quite some time. And if we keep going, then its all going to come to a crashing halt at some point. A bloated, jaundiced corpse of a government is gasping, and choking under serious duress from infections of all kinds--inundating its airways and collapsing all of its defenses. A bunch of sludge has accumulated over time in its veins and passages---killing it.
We need a serious house-cleaning; and the public needs to be a lot more careful in its choices. I think that we really need to move far away from the current system, b/c it just isn't working anymore. I don't think that it has worked in my lifetime.
This is JMHO.....
And I am an admitted radical........I have been giving serious consideration to leaving this country within the next five years. I used to think about how to change the political spectrum. And I used to think about where I would want to live.
But now....I am actually, seriously considering living outside the states and thinking about what it would take, what it would mean with regard to my family, and trying to narrow my ideal locale down to a couple places.
Currently, I am thinking that S. America--either Chile, Uruguay, or Brazil might have some great ex-pat communities.
Last edited by Tyler_Derden; 05/23/11 01:25 AM.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Even though I agree with you that Obama pretty much is carrying on Bush's 3rd term, that doesn't mean that Repubs should like him. Bush's approval ratings were like 25% or somewhere close at the end of his term. Assuming the population is 50/50 of Dems and Repubs, that means only about half of the Repubs approved of him. Through in the fact that Obama has a (D) next to his name, how could you possibly think that the majority of Repubs would support him, when roughly half supported Bush at the end of his term?
Stupid article with a stupid point, IMHO.
The point of the article is that R = D.
Conservatives have little to no reason to like Bush or Obama. Liberals have little to no reason like Bush or Obama.
What does that tell you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Republicans, Why All the Hate? Obama is Completing Bush's 3rd Term
Because most republicans were not all that enamored with Bush...
But on the other hand, the article could just as easily be titled, "Democrats, why the support?" 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I am reliably informed that Costa Rica has a significant community of American transplants. Many retirees from certain Gov't agencies.
Personally, I've been looking at Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania.
Something big is coming, it has been building for a long, long time, the numbers are coming to a crisis point. The recent economic problems are a pinprick compared to what is looming on the horizon.
I'm not sure anymore that it can be stopped, or if it should. I am beginning to question whether Democracy, even Representative Democracy, is really a functional form of government for the long haul.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082 |
Quote:
I'm ready for a real candidate from the GOP.
Hell, I'm ready for a REAL Candidate and I don't give a damn about party.
I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of our elected officials..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
The problem with Democracy is that almost half of all voters have below average intelligence.  Then again, as Churchill said ... "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
I'm not sure anymore that it can be stopped, or if it should. I am beginning to question whether Democracy, even Representative Democracy, is really a functional form of government for the long haul.
My question then is, "So what is?"
I think we live in a time where it's possible to get rid of the representatives. In a world where we can access the internet quickly, on small handheld computers and whatnot, we as a people could vote individually and without a need for representative votes. We could still have a legislative branch, but they would be relegated to introducing and committee-type actions involving laws/bills. One good thing about this is they wouldn't be able to print 1000 page manifestos anymore, it would have to be more streamlined and worded in such a way that a layman like me could understand it. But, I think we could also get more work done
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I would argue that people would never think of the long term ramifications of things or go in depth on what possible unintended consequences would result, but, then again, it's not like it seems our current representatives do any different.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
That's possible, sure. It could also, potentially, make people pay more attention to what's going on in this country.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Keep this idea in mind next time a large group wants to order a Pizza delivery. You can't get simple agreements, somebody will walk away unhappy. Throw in issues that most people just don't understand and you end up getting absolutely nothing done.
I am coming to the conclusion that a Monarchy may very well be the best system, particularly long-term. You have someone trained from birth to rule and with an interest in preserving their families' only reason for existence.
Restricting the vote to those who pay taxes is another possible option.
We are now less than 20 years away from either a massive economic collapse, generational warfare, or both. Most politicians have known this was coming for many, many years. They have done NOTHING to stop it or even slow it down in any major way. The Debt cannot be sustained, Social Security cannot be sustained, these two alone will put an end to the American society as we know it.
It is not a complex problem to understand, at all. Simple math is all it takes, it is a pyramid game, a Ponzi scam. It is worth noting that when it all came crrashing down, Carlo Ponzi had apparently come to believe in his own BS, running around his office looking for more money that he thought he had. It takes a seriously deluded mind to dig yourself this far into a hole.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
if a Monarchy system is the best, then why don't any of the world powers use it?
even in GB, the Monarchy is 'just for show'. Parliament has all the power and the Monarchy's job is to give speeches and basically go out front and make people feel good (and really there is nothing wrong with that and it only costs their citizen's $1 per year each to do it most years).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Liberals have little to no reason like Bush or Obama.
Liberals have a lot to like about both Bush & Obama.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm ready for a real candidate from the GOP.
Hell, I'm ready for a REAL Candidate and I don't give a damn about party.
I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of our elected officials..
You have a good point, Daman, but I don't expect the Democrats to select a conservative. There are actual conservatives within the GOP (however misguided they might be), some of them are even running for the presidency in 2012. Some of them haven't yet declared (like my top two choices). If the GOP selects another candidate like Bush or Dole or Bush or McCain, they deserve to lose and my vote would go to a third party candidate. If they select someone I can give my vote, they'll get my vote.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Personally, I've been looking at Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania.
Not to make you sound silly, but Tasmania is part of Australia.
Quote:
Something big is coming, it has been building for a long, long time, the numbers are coming to a crisis point. The recent economic problems are a pinprick compared to what is looming on the horizon.
This is true - and it won't be pretty.
Quote:
I am beginning to question whether Democracy, even Representative Democracy, is really a functional form of government for the long haul.
Representative Democracy (a Republic) is definitely a stable government over the long haul - as long as the foundations are set and not permitted to be eroded.
The erosion of the foundation is what has beleaguered the US for a long, long time. In the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin when asked about what type of government was agreed upon at the Constitutional Convention, he responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
Keep this idea in mind next time a large group wants to order a Pizza delivery. You can't get simple agreements, somebody will walk away unhappy. Throw in issues that most people just don't understand and you end up getting absolutely nothing done.
I agree, and this is largely what congress does. What I'm proposing is that they reform into an academic or thought-based type of role, hashing out the reforms and laws so that their people can vote on them. The representatives wouldn't be voting for a whole district or a state, just as citizens. Congress would become a think-tank of sorts. Each reform/law would have a yes, no, or remove option for the vote where the people could tell the congress to implement it, keep working on it, or remove it from the ballot for the foreseeable future only to be brought back in a very different form. The one downside, like you said, is that how can we trust people to be informed enough to vote? I like the "paying taxes" condition.
I've thought that a monarchy would be good too, although, it's a bit of a crapshoot. What if the person is a sociopath? What if they're not willing to do what it takes to keep the country safe? There would have to be some way for the people to be heard and enforce a "just" rule by their monarch.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082 |
Quote:
but I don't expect the Democrats to select a conservative.
LOL Are you sure? According to this article, Obama is doing some of the same things that Bush did, and it's pretty clear, Bush was conservative 
Anyway,,, The labeling needs to stop because it doesn't work anymore.
Liberals aren't really all that liberal and conservatives aren't all that conservative anymore. Unless you only look at the extremes of both.
I'm not one who believes in listening to extremists.. The Tea Party and its liberal counterpart (not sure what name they go by) should both be ignored...
JMO however
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The Tea Party and its liberal counterpart (not sure what name they go by) should both be ignored...
In exit polling at the last election, 41% of voters described themselves as supportive of the tea party movement.. and you believe they should be ignored... perfect way to run the democracy.
Let's just stay on the back and forth centrist path we've been on.. it's being working GREAT!!!!!!
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
I think the general idea of the "Tea Party" movement was founded on good principles. "Less federal government, more control at the local level, etc", but like most noble causes it sort of got hijacked by extremists ... or at least the press would only highlight the extremists. and paint them as the entire movement.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I think the general idea of the "Tea Party" movement was founded on good principles. "Less federal government, more control at the local level, etc", but like most noble causes it sort of got hijacked by extremists ... or at least the press would only highlight the extremists. and paint them as the entire movement.
I agree with you that there were good ideological principles behind it ... but that lasted about five minutes.
It became an extension of the GOP very quickly.
When Sarah Palin is your keynote speaker, and Michele Bachmann represents you in Congress ... you have no one to blame but yourself when you get written off.
In the end, it was doomed by GOP candidates who jumped on the coattails of the movement, as well as the complete morons that make up a great deal of it's attendants (and, no, I'm not calling them all morons, but I've passed through their rallies, and I'd have to say the idiots come out in large numbers, which happens at most rallies of political nature).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
... as well as the complete morons that make up a great deal of it's attendants (and, no, I'm not calling them all morons, but I've passed through their rallies, and I'd have to say the idiots come out in large numbers, which hapsens at most rallies of political nature).
Well of course ... most level-headed people are going to have something better to do with their time. Like you're saying, you can go to pretty much any political rally for any "cause" and find scores of people who can't answer basic questions about anything.
But like DC is saying ... if 41% of people consider themselves aligned with "Tea party" principles ... that doesn't mean they are represented by the 1% that show up for rallies, make the news, or seal-clap for Sarah Palin.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I agree with you that there were good ideological principles behind it ... but that lasted about five minutes.
A lot of those principles are still alive in congress.
Quote:
It became an extension of the GOP very quickly.
It was always associated with the GOP.. it was disgruntled GOP members that formed it and made it what it was...
Quote:
When Sarah Palin is your keynote speaker, and Michele Bachmann represents you in Congress ... you have no one to blame but yourself when you get written off.
If you want to write them off for that then you are as shortsighted as anybody else. There are a lot of good people in the tea party with good ideas who are trying to steer this debate in the right direction.. sounds like you are letting the media drive your opinion of the whole group more than you want to let on.
Quote:
In the end, it was doomed by GOP candidates who jumped on the coattails of the movement, as well as the complete morons that make up a great deal of it's attendants (and, no, I'm not calling them all morons, but I've passed through their rallies, and I'd have to say the idiots come out in large numbers, which happens at most rallies of political nature).
People that go to any rally are always the 'most enthusiastic".. let's just call them that... I lived in DC for a long time and you don't find many rational people at any rally... plus you see them in their most whipped up energetic state.. heck if you saw most of them away from the rally you would probably never know it was them.. so I don't go by what I see at a rally.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
A lot of those principles are still alive in congress.
I'm afraid to ask ...
Please tell me you're not speaking of the Ryan budget?
Quote:
If you want to write them off for that then you are as shortsighted as anybody else. There are a lot of good people in the tea party with good ideas who are trying to steer this debate in the right direction.. sounds like you are letting the media drive your opinion of the whole group more than you want to let on.
I didn't write them off for that ... they pretty much wrote themselves off for that.
Palin has been a keynote speaker at many of their events. She's vocal about the group. Bachmann heads 'The Tea Party Caucus' in Congress, and has also been a keynote speaker on many occasions.
Hell, anyone could have good, legitimate ideals and make countless attempts to steer the debate in the right direction ... but when you run Beavis & Butthead up the flagpole as your spokespeople, then it's you who is to blame for being labeled a joke ... not media spin.
Quote:
People that go to any rally are always the 'most enthusiastic".. let's just call them that... I lived in DC for a long time and you don't find many rational people at any rally... plus you see them in their most whipped up energetic state.. heck if you saw most of them away from the rally you would probably never know it was them.. so I don't go by what I see at a rally.
Fair point ... but for a lot of people, what you see is what you get.
When it comes down to it ... I think people like the idea of the Tea Party more than what it actually has become.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
A lot of those principles are still alive in congress.
I'm afraid to ask ...
Please tell me you're not speaking of the Ryan budget?
I like a lot about Ryan's budget but other than that I'm talking about a couple issues still being talked about and some that haven't really been addressed since the tea party took a fair share of seats... The tea party lead the way on the debate to not raise the debt ceiling without some significant guaranteed cuts.. they have actual proposals on immigration control.. and a lot of smaller initiatives to give states some rights...
Just out of curiosity, what's wrong with Ryans budget?
Quote:
When it comes down to it ... I think people like the idea of the Tea Party more than what it actually has become.
What did people expect it to become in 2 years?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
Quote:
And anyone who gets a nomination from either party, is a stooge
I like where you are going with your post but this line above is the one I want to address. It seems to me that there are some very powerful political forces in and around the government and media that seems to do a very good job of whittling away anyone who could come in and be an independent thinker.
For example, take Mitch Daniels. It is being suggested in some circles that the reason he bailed out is that his wife would take a beating in the press. She left Mitch back in the 90s for a married doctor in California. She left Mitch AND her FOUR daughters, broke up the good doctors marriage and then four years later returned to and remarried Mitch.
Cheri Daniels may be a terrible person but she would get skewered just so Mitch can be president. Mitch may very well be the best person for the job (just saying hypothetically) but that is not going to happen now.
Most every person has skeletons or has done things that would receive public humiliations and they don't just go after the candidate they go after the family as well as they have done with Sarah Palin.
The end result I think is that most people want nothing to do with public service at ANY level because of the vitriolic nature of the media and the pervasiveness of the internet.
So in the end we get stooges who are of a particular type of person, not someone who has crashed and burned and got back up or someone who has a flawless marriage. We are not getting common folk--they want no part of the political process.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Just out of curiosity, what's wrong with Ryans budget?
First and foremost, it's a publicity stunt. I'd wager that Ryan himself knows that not only is the plan not feasible, but it stands no chance of ever being enacted.
Ignoring that ...
The biggest glaring problem is the guy is pitching that we ditch Medicaid/Medicare in favor of taxpayer-subsidized private plans.
What happened again to all of the folks who were fuming that Obama's plan was socialist and detrimental and would cause rationed care? Did they move to Canada? Because I haven't heard them griping about Ryan's budget.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
The biggest glaring problem is the guy is pitching that we ditch Medicaid/Medicare in favor of taxpayer-subsidized private plans.
What happened again to all of the folks who were fuming that Obama's plan was socialist and detrimental and would cause rationed care? Did they move to Canada? Because I haven't heard them griping about Ryan's budget.
quite possible that I'm just missing something obvious here. but, isn't going from a completely tax funded Medicaid/Medicare to partially subsidized private care mean less taxpayer burden on it? and how does having less government control make it socialist (from complete government operation to subsidizing private)?
or are you just talking about the silly 'death panel' things that were bandied about at one point?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
LOL Are you sure? According to this article, Obama is doing some of the same things that Bush did, and it's pretty clear, Bush was conservative
Bush a conservative?  That's a good one! You're funny!
Quote:
Anyway,,, The labeling needs to stop because it doesn't work anymore.
Liberals aren't really all that liberal and conservatives aren't all that conservative anymore. Unless you only look at the extremes of both.
Why? I'm conservative. I'm ultra-conservative and damned proud of it!
Quote:
I'm not one who believes in listening to extremists.. The Tea Party and its liberal counterpart (not sure what name they go by) should both be ignored...
JMO however
As a member of the Tea Party, I'll ignore what you said about me and my colleagues. It's okay though. I'll let you take the country down. We're already down the drain. Why not make it all the way to the sewer?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082 |
Quote:
Quote:
The Tea Party and its liberal counterpart (not sure what name they go by) should both be ignored...
In exit polling at the last election, 41% of voters described themselves as supportive of the tea party movement.. and you believe they should be ignored... perfect way to run the democracy.
Let's just stay on the back and forth centrist path we've been on.. it's being working GREAT!!!!!!
In my opinion the Tea Party is indeed the extremist wing of the Republican party and the very thing that is ruining it.
So yeah, Just like I would ignore the ultra left, l'LL ignore the ultra right.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844 |
Wait a minute.....the Taxed Enough Already party is ultra right wing?
The "party" that says we are taxed enough - the one that says gov't. spending is too high? They are ultra right wing?
Well, if so, I guess I'm with them.
One thing you need to be certain of is this country is flat out, 100% screwed with the status quo.
What you need to ask yourself is " how much pain can we take", AND "should we sink the country by not accepting the pain now"?
The problem is not that taxes aren't high enough. The problem is the gov't. spends too much. There is not one single problem/dilemma facing this country that congress doesn't believe can be fixed by spending more.
It's time the idiots wake up. Spending has to go down. It will hurt. Hurt 100 million? Or hurt 300 million. Daman - you make the call. What would you do?
Keep the status quo? Spending out of your butt - just to postpone the inevitable - prolong it, and have it affect more and more people?
Or do you suck it up now, hurting as few as possible, while benefiting the rest of our country. What's your choice?
It's time for hard decisions. We need a congress that can make them - not sound bites.
Ever hear of Greece?
Ever hear of bankrupt?
Ever hear of inflation? Or printing money to cover bills you don't have the money to pay?
Somebody needs to do something. And if, IF the TEA party is the one to start it, call them what the hell you want to......call them ultra jackasses for all I care. Something needs to be done. Yet you, Mr. Self Proclaimed Middle of the Road guy - You have no answers. You like the spending.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,150
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,150 |
I also want to drastically reduce government spending. Count me in!
The harsh reality is that government spending will be reduced drastically. It's just that I'd prefer that we do it now and take the pain, rather than keep throwing money we don't have at a bandaid to cover a gaping wound that will bleed us into total chaos. Rest assured, if we continue on Obama's course, we WILL run out of other people's money.....and it will get ugly.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844 |
We're already out of other people's money. And I'll say it right now - it's not just O that did it to us. It's been going on for well over a decade - heck, 2 or 3 decades.
However - the harsh reality is, we cut spending NOW. (not add a trillion or so in health care), and we suffer the short term affects - 10 to 20 years - OR, we keep on spending. Getting lost in the blame game, while actually increasing spending, and there fore debt - until the time comes that the dollar is a joke, foreign countries won't buy our debt, and everyone that thinks they have a retirement, or money in the bank, is faced with "this crap ain't worth what I dropped in the toilet this morning."
We either suck it up and cut spending now - or the whole country goes down the tube. And it WILL happen. Even the "rich" will be scrounging. After all, we don't have jobs here. We have accountants, lawyers, computer programmers - and they all pay well - but the problem is, the people that pay for those services don't have jobs to pay for them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
First and foremost, it's a publicity stunt. I'd wager that Ryan himself knows that not only is the plan not feasible, but it stands no chance of ever being enacted.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ryan doesn't realize that its exaggerated and he won't get a fair amount of what he wants.. however it's severe cuts, it helps because it stands in stark contrast to the joke cuts proposed by Obama and by the softer establishment republicans... and that is what we need, we need somebody to show what a joke the "centrist" establishment has become. Waffling from center-left to center-right and back again has gotten us to where we are right now...
I will say this, the far right hates what the left stands for and tries to deny all things they want to spend money on.. the far left hates the far right and tries to deny all things hey want to spend money on.... centrists don't hate anybody and therefore, they never say no to spending more money...
Quote:
The biggest glaring problem is the guy is pitching that we ditch Medicaid/Medicare in favor of taxpayer-subsidized private plans.
What happened again to all of the folks who were fuming that Obama's plan was socialist and detrimental and would cause rationed care? Did they move to Canada? Because I haven't heard them griping about Ryan's budget.
How is taking people who are in a 100% public funded program and putting them in a subsidized private program the same as migrating people who are private programs into the public option?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,082 |
Quote:
Wait a minute.....the Taxed Enough Already party is ultra right wing?
The "party" that says we are taxed enough - the one that says gov't. spending is too high? They are ultra right wing?
Well, if so, I guess I'm with them.
Man, you're as bad as Django.., I make one comment and you go and take it to extremes..., and you wonder why I think extremists should be banned
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,127
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,127 |
Quote:
Quote:
Wait a minute.....the Taxed Enough Already party is ultra right wing?
The "party" that says we are taxed enough - the one that says gov't. spending is too high? They are ultra right wing?
Well, if so, I guess I'm with them.
Man, you're as bad as Django.., I make one comment and you go and take it to extremes..., and you wonder why I think extremists should be banned
Just what did he take to extreme?
Here is what you said:
"In my opinion the Tea Party is indeed the extremist wing of the Republican party"
It's supposed to be hard! If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Wait a minute.....the Taxed Enough Already party is ultra right wing?
The "party" that says we are taxed enough - the one that says gov't. spending is too high? They are ultra right wing?
Well, if so, I guess I'm with them.
Man, you're as bad as Django.., I make one comment and you go and take it to extremes..., and you wonder why I think extremists should be banned
Just what did he take to extreme?
Here is what you said:
"In my opinion the Tea Party is indeed the extremist wing of the Republican party"
And that was the major theme and platform of the Tea Party ... that taxes, and especially spending, are too high.
I can't really think of too many other issues that they raised as a major part of their platform .... except for the fact that Washington insiders have been spending us into insolvency, and that it has to stop ..... and that we are taxed too heavily, and destroying jobs as a result.
There may have been other elements here and there that stressed some other agenda ..... but the taxation and spending part was the biggest part of the agenda by far. I have a hard time figuring out what part of the agenda was radical and extremist.
Maybe Daman can fill in the details of what he found to be extreme, ultra right wing.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
In my opinion the Tea Party is indeed the extremist wing of the Republican party and the very thing that is ruining it.
You are 100% incorrect. What is ruining the republican party is wishy washy pseudo "centrist" conservatives that want to embrace bad liberal ideas and govern as democrat-lite. The ideals of the tea party.. radical spending reductions, states rights, reduction in the entitlement state, strong immigration policy.. those are the only ideas left that could SAVE the republican party...
I understand people arguing against the two-party system but what you are in favor of is essentially the one-party system. You want to ignore anybody that is outside of what you consider to be a "centrist" position of either party.. so basically you want one centrist party that never says no to anybody while those with strongly held convictions on either the conservative or the liberal side are ignored and unrepresented...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
I understand people arguing against the two-party system but what you are in favor of is essentially the one-party system. You want to ignore anybody that is outside of what you consider to be a "centrist" position of either party.. so basically you want one centrist party that never says no to anybody while those with strongly held convictions on either the conservative or the liberal side are ignored and unrepresented...
There are so many mischaracterizations in there I don't know where to begin ...
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Obama is Completing Bush's 3rd
Term
|
|
