Oh thats a bunch of bullshit. The Iraq war and other discretionary military spending is what is driving the defecits. Oh I also forgot about Bushs perscription drug bondoggle. Its not the moderates driving up spending its the die hard GOP members.
Oh thats a bunch of bullshit. The Iraq war and other discretionary military spending is what is driving the defecits. Oh I also forgot about Bushs perscription drug bondoggle. Its not the moderates driving up spending its the die hard GOP members.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
Yes because polarization is good.
How is pushing people who dont really stand for what the party does back into the party that does polarization?
This is called cleaning house.
Not everyone should be in lock step with the extreme agenda Cheney and company have embarked on. Cleaning House. Yes. I'll keep that in mind. We'll see how cleaned the house gets.
My Neo-con policies? Which policies would these be?
Are you trying to help me with my argument? I basically said the exact same thing above.
ebaycj
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2002
- 5,418
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: loki8481
it's a crazy, crazy world.
steele in maryland is running as a democrat. I mean, literally... his bumper stickers say Steele: Democrat and are a nice shade of blue
NO HE IS NOT !!!
He is a registered republican. He toes the party line. He was hand chosen to run by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. He admitted all of this when he was debating with his opponent on "Meet the Press". His viewpoints are not even close to "democratic" (the party, not the government type). He is trying to hide the fact that he is a republican, Tim Russert even commented that "nowhere on his website did the word republican appear".
THOSE BUMPER STICKERS ARE DECEPTION, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. His "explanation" was that they meant something similar to the phrase "Reagan democrats", and that he wanted the "Steele democrats" (which he made up) to vote for him.
PLEASE DEAR GOD DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS LIAR.
EDIT: LINKAGE
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...rticle/2006/10/29/AR2006102900240.html
Just more evidence that the democrats are the moderate party with a mandate, the republican part has become the party of extremists.
The democrat positions are the majority positions, the democrats better represent the will of the public. It should be unsurprising that moderate republicans/conservatives identify more with the mainstream and that they've been forced to the left like everyone else.
Who would stay in a party that calls you a terrorist if you don't agree with the president? Can you get anymore fascist than that?
The democrat positions are the majority positions, the democrats better represent the will of the public. It should be unsurprising that moderate republicans/conservatives identify more with the mainstream and that they've been forced to the left like everyone else.
Who would stay in a party that calls you a terrorist if you don't agree with the president? Can you get anymore fascist than that?
Uh, the people you are calling RINOs arent neocons, they are moderate republicans disgusted by the fact neocons control the GOP. The neocons arent moderates, and they are fully entrenched in the GOP.
The people leaving the GOP are moderates disgusted by the fiscal irresponsibility of the party. Those leaving arent the ones that have caused the fiscal irresponsibility.
Originally posted by: Vic
I thought the country was moving to the right?...
It was until they right dropped the ball and went overboard. Now its moving back towards the center. Which is a good thing.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,333
- 136
No, the country is moving to the left and has been for a century. Case in point: Bush is a fiscal liberal who just happens to platform on some socially conservative issues.Originally posted by: Wreckem
It was until they right dropped the ball and went overboard. Now its moving back towards the center. Which is a good thing.Originally posted by: Vic
I thought the country was moving to the right?...
Bush isn't a fiscal liberal, at all- he's a member of the lootocracy, a faction of the financial elite who are attempting to break the government while facilitating a huge transfer of wealth and income to a very, very few at the top.
They're using a two pronged attack- cutting taxes for themselves, even as they promote deficit spending in sectors of the economy beneficial to them- the military, security, along with farm and pharma...
Increases in the national debt have averaged over half a trillion a year under the Repubs, even as services to the most needy have decreased... at least when the Dems spend money, it doesn't go straight into the pockets of those currently offshoring american jobs at an increasing rate...
And the small taxcuts allowed to the middle class will largely disappear under the AMT next year, but the debt will continue to grow, along with the interest rate and maintenance costs... cuts for those at the top won't disappear, however...
It's easy to see what they're doing, and who they're duping to achieve it, if one looks just past the end of their nose....
They intend to destroy SS by hollowing out the treasury from beneath it with more important financial obligations, and will ultimately make the donut hole in the medicare drug plan surmountable only for the wealthiest seniors... welfare for the Rich. And once they're done aggravating/occupying the rest of the world, we'll need a really big military just to hold on, and to protect their overseas investments....
And they're doing it by preying on our fears, our admiration for wealth, and our love of an easy credit good time...
I really hate to see honest and moderate repubs deserting their party at the present time- I've been hoping they'd find a way to take it back from the Right Fringe who are running it now...
They're using a two pronged attack- cutting taxes for themselves, even as they promote deficit spending in sectors of the economy beneficial to them- the military, security, along with farm and pharma...
Increases in the national debt have averaged over half a trillion a year under the Repubs, even as services to the most needy have decreased... at least when the Dems spend money, it doesn't go straight into the pockets of those currently offshoring american jobs at an increasing rate...
And the small taxcuts allowed to the middle class will largely disappear under the AMT next year, but the debt will continue to grow, along with the interest rate and maintenance costs... cuts for those at the top won't disappear, however...
It's easy to see what they're doing, and who they're duping to achieve it, if one looks just past the end of their nose....
They intend to destroy SS by hollowing out the treasury from beneath it with more important financial obligations, and will ultimately make the donut hole in the medicare drug plan surmountable only for the wealthiest seniors... welfare for the Rich. And once they're done aggravating/occupying the rest of the world, we'll need a really big military just to hold on, and to protect their overseas investments....
And they're doing it by preying on our fears, our admiration for wealth, and our love of an easy credit good time...
I really hate to see honest and moderate repubs deserting their party at the present time- I've been hoping they'd find a way to take it back from the Right Fringe who are running it now...
trenchfoot
Lifer
- Aug 5, 2000
- 14,863
- 7,396
- 136
QFT:thumbsup:
the problem for honest and moderate repubs getting elected is campaign funding.
the pnac neocons and the folks down on k street are joined at the hip. they see honest and moderate repubs as a financial liability and tolerate them only to get their votes.
Puffnstuff
Lifer
- Mar 9, 2005
- 16,138
- 4,832
- 136
Radical christians and radical muslims are all the same to me. Crazy religious zealots scare me and zealots with power scare me even more.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Originally posted by: ebaycj
Originally posted by: loki8481
it's a crazy, crazy world.
steele in maryland is running as a democrat. I mean, literally... his bumper stickers say Steele: Democrat and are a nice shade of blue
NO HE IS NOT !!!
He is a registered republican. He toes the party line. He was hand chosen to run by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. He admitted all of this when he was debating with his opponent on "Meet the Press". His viewpoints are not even close to "democratic" (the party, not the government type). He is trying to hide the fact that he is a republican, Tim Russert even commented that "nowhere on his website did the word republican appear".
THOSE BUMPER STICKERS ARE DECEPTION, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. His "explanation" was that they meant something similar to the phrase "Reagan democrats", and that he wanted the "Steele democrats" (which he made up) to vote for him.
PLEASE DEAR GOD DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS LIAR.
EDIT: LINKAGE
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...rticle/2006/10/29/AR2006102900240.html
Thanks for bringing this topic up.Interesting link, Zebo, particularly considering that their arguments are based on lies- the lie of the Leftist Media being the giveaway to anybody who can actually think for themselves, as Libertarians profess to do....
There are only 5 Media companies left in the US, with 4 of them having profoundly conservative ownership and leadership. The fifth, Viacom, has pretty much seen the light- that being if they want to avoid problems with Executive branch appointees in regulatory agencies, then they'll toe the line, anyway... as your link points out, Repubs, so-called Conservatives, have held the executive branch for most of the last 50 years...
The author's attempt to tar Dems with the Guantanamo brush is extremely lame, as well, as has been Libertarian alliance with the Right. The power of rightwing wealth would crush the middle class in that halfbaked libertarian utopia...
There are only 5 Media companies left in the US, with 4 of them having profoundly conservative ownership and leadership. The fifth, Viacom, has pretty much seen the light- that being if they want to avoid problems with Executive branch appointees in regulatory agencies, then they'll toe the line, anyway... as your link points out, Repubs, so-called Conservatives, have held the executive branch for most of the last 50 years...
The author's attempt to tar Dems with the Guantanamo brush is extremely lame, as well, as has been Libertarian alliance with the Right. The power of rightwing wealth would crush the middle class in that halfbaked libertarian utopia...
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,333
- 136
So true. I've said it many times.
Jhhnn can puff his usual hot air. He just does that to disguise his prejudice and ignorance. The 2 party system is like if the devil had 2 faces and 2 names, with morons fighting over which face and which name was better for them.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,333
- 136
pfft... maybe if you partisan zealots understood the actual nature of politics in America. Suppose 3 different political agendas, labeled A, B, and C. Democrats think they are A, Republicans think they are B, while the leadership of BOTH parties is actually C. To make things worse, when Dems and Pubs see C, they don't recognize it for what it actually is (which is fascism BTW, or "lootocracy" if you prefer, it's more or less the same thing), but as B and A respectively.
Now does it become clear how politicians can move from one party to the other, or how the 2 sides can disagree over whether the media is "liberal" or "conservative"? (the media is "C," FTW). Wake up, people.
Now does it become clear how politicians can move from one party to the other, or how the 2 sides can disagree over whether the media is "liberal" or "conservative"? (the media is "C," FTW). Wake up, people.
The leadership of both parties have the same goal, to get them and there backers richer and so Party A and Paerty B share many of the same goals, but IMO they are not one and the same. Not even close.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,333
- 136
Oh, but they are. You have to look at their sociological origins, both of which date back at least to the mid-1800s.
Ideology B began in small farming communities where (with more primitive farming methods) there was more work to be done that workers to do it. So anyone who wasn't pulling his fair share of work, like the "town drunk" for example, was bringing down the wealth of the community as a whole. This led to a belief in a kind of social morality authoritarianism. Everyone needs to be healthy and in the right mindset to work. For example, an aborted baby is one less new worker. Or if gay sex can lead to AIDS and a strong young man removed from the workforce, then gay sex shouldn't be allowed. Get it?
Now Ideology A sprang up in the crowded industrial cities where there were more people than jobs and a small group of profiteering industrialists controlled the amount of work available. Because the cities were crowded, it was necessary to tolerate the differences of one's neighbors in order to get along with them. OTOH, a type of economic morality authoritarism sprang up, where rich misers who made too much profits were perceived as hogging to big a share of the pie and not providing enough jobs to those who needed them.
Both ideologies share the same goals. Building community wealth for the well-being of all. Getting along with your neighbors, raising good children, providing for the common welfare, etc.
But, like I said, neither side wants to see that. We they see the other side, they see this ideology C, which is the combination of the most authoritarian aspects of both A and B, and which serves the rich who want productive slaves and control of your production.
BTW, I'm a Libertarian who did not come from the "Right." 15 years ago, in my own naive and foolish youth, my politics closely resembled socialism, and I was very much a Democrat. I marched in protest rallies against Bush Sr.'s Iraq War and campaigned for Clinton, etc. Over time though, I recognized the deception that clouds the zealots' vision from seeing their own hypocracy. For the most part, the sheep of both sides follow solely because of fear of the other side, and not for any real or substantial agenda that differentiates them from the other beyond that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter