So what exactly does the Right stand for these days?

[OneOfTheseDays]

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc. They may not be GOOD ideas but at least they are getting the debates out in the open. Even if the ultimate decision is to do nothing the fact that there is open debate can only be a good thing.

If we are not continuously evolving and figuring out how we can better ourselves then tell me what the hell is the point of a Democracy. The Right seems to have this odd nostalgic desire to get back to a time and period that frankly never existed.

 

[daishi5]

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc. They may not be GOOD ideas but at least they are getting the debates out in the open. Even if the ultimate decision is to do nothing the fact that there is open debate can only be a good thing.

If we are not continuously evolving and figuring out how we can better ourselves then tell me what the hell is the point of a Democracy. The Right seems to have this odd nostalgic desire to get back to a time and period that frankly never existed.

You are having a problem with names, the republicans have lost any and all direction except for "we are not socialists like democrats," "vote for us and we will continue to persecute homosexuals," and "we like guns." The right, or people who have conservative views are not all republicans, and a lot of people who believe in social rights are abandoning the party as the republicans try to pander to the fundies.

The republicans are not out to stand for something, they are out to win. When they win they get power. When they have power people give them money for favors. Who knows, maybe the republican plan will work, maybe this really is the best way to achieve and maintain power. I doubt it, but it might work for them. More likely they will crash and burn, and they will have to find some form of real ideals to rally around again, but right now they don't have them.

And, as a person who believes strongly in gun rights, I am pissed at the current system. I have to choose between "take rights away from gun owners" and "take rights away from gays." Can I please get a candidate who believes that his people should be free, and I mean really free not just free to do what he likes?

 

[cubby1223]

If you still don't understand by now what "the right" stands for, then you'll never understand.

You're a lost cause with your closed mind.

 

[dmcowen674]

So what exactly does the Right stand for these days?

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc.

Republicans don't give a shit about the country, they hate it.

 

[Colt45]

There was a point in time when I could see a use for a conservative party... the minimalist govn't, less tax, let the cowboys sort it out kind. But that's a distant memory now.

Republican or democrat, smaller govn't is only a dream now (short of revolution).
If someone is burning my cash, they might as well heat *my* house with it.

As pete seeger once said:
"I'd like to say I'm more conservative than Goldwater. He just wanted to turn the clock back to when there was no income tax. I want to turn the clock back to when people lived in small villages and took care of each other."

 

[Craig234]

The Republicans are for the same thing thing they have been for a century: the rich. And to get elected to help the rich, pandering to almost anyone for votes.

That means the most consistent thing you will find are policies for the rich. The next thing you will find are any number of pseudo-populist appeals to grab anyone they can alienate from Democrats.

You nervous about the growth of big governemnt? THey're for small government! (Ignore what they actually do, take advantage of Democrats not lying about their position and talk small goverment!)

Better yet, since any government not serving the rich costs the irch, use that small government issue to oppose all kinds of Democrats' programs for the the people!

Can we scare you about communism? OK, The Democrats are soft on commies we protect you!

Do the Democrats shown concern about gun casualties and worry you about gun rights? Is there a ready made most powerful non-corporate lobby in the US, the NRA? We're the gun rights party!

In fact, Democrats all hate guns and want to take all of yours! Vote Republican!

Indeed , any 'mob' issue that pits when the public acts like a mob against a principle, you can usualy find the Republican party there ot pander to the mob and grab the votes.

Hey, Evangelical America, we notice the telemarketing laws have increased your numbers a ton. You feeling the government keeps you down with all this church-state separation? We'll not worry about that!

Vote for us and we'll bring back Congress during recess to sign a Terry Schiavo bill that doesn't cost the wealthy a penny, but secures your votes for us as the 'evangelical party!'

Heck, we'll throw in obscure biblical phrases to presedential speeeches olnly you catch! wink wink! Since you don't read books, you won't see the expose of how we call you crazy in private!

You not worried about all that whining on torturing those foreigners? We're your party, and we guarantee you plenty of slogans to let you sleep at night about how you aren't doing anything wrong to allow torture!

Hm, I hear you, not making much, really hate the poor getting food stamps and aid. Well, that sure fits in with our desire for cheap labor for the rich - and we'll attack that aid all day! Those scum!

When Democrats passed the civil rights bill and whites were furious - hey, we're for 'staes' rights', we're for 'law & order', you don't like blacks, we're your party!

Thos gays acting out? Wanting to marry and you don't like it? We're not going to wag our finger at you and calll you any names - we rspect your principled defense of marriage!

Indeed - our own leader, Dick Cheney, has a gay daughter and sees this a bit differently? Don't worry, he might discreetly say so, but he won't say anything to you.

Sometimes we'll hop on your your mob concerns and get your vote, and sometimes we'll use our massive propaganda network to create the mob concerns that fit our agenda. Either way, vote Republican!

 

[Red Dawn]

If you still don't understand by now what "the right" stands for, then you'll never understand.

You're a lost cause with your closed mind.

The Right stands against the Left or more precisely Obama.

 

[Double Trouble]

Well, I think saying "the right" doesn't really stand for anything right now is a fair criticism. True conservatism lost its way during the Bush years, replaced with a neo-con hubris, expansion of government and out of control spending. The conservatives need to redefine the republican party -- and not towards the fundie wing either.

On the flip side, it's hard to blame the repubs for just being obstructionists when they simply don't have the votes to do anything else right now. The white house, the senate and the house are completely in dem hands. What exactly can the repubs do, other than band together and try to stop the things they consider bad for the country? Do you think Pelosi and Reid really want to work with the repubs to come up with bi-partisan bills? If so, I have some beach-front property to sell you in Nebraska.

 

[IronWing]

The fundamental pillars of the Republican PArty have not changed in four decades, only their tactics and cause de jours have shfited. They are still the party of greed and mean spirited stupidity.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc. They may not be GOOD ideas but at least they are getting the debates out in the open. Even if the ultimate decision is to do nothing the fact that there is open debate can only be a good thing.

If we are not continuously evolving and figuring out how we can better ourselves then tell me what the hell is the point of a Democracy. The Right seems to have this odd nostalgic desire to get back to a time and period that frankly never existed.

P&P, power and priviledge, what else have they worked for but to be like the "more equal" ones from Animal Farm.

 

[Genx87]

Lots of bitterness in this thread.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The right, as the opposition party, now serves as a check against the left, who still control two branches of the federal government. They are succeeding in that mandate, as evident by the results in MA.

The Right seems to have this odd nostalgic desire to get back to a time and period that frankly never existed.

The right is not some hive mind entity.

Lots of bitterness in this thread.

The harsh slap of reality always hurts more in the morning.

 

[Hacp]

Less taxes, less government, less unions.

 

[rudder]

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc. They may not be GOOD ideas but at least they are getting the debates out in the open. Even if the ultimate decision is to do nothing the fact that there is open debate can only be a good thing.

.

mmm no they are not proposing "new" changes... they are trying to rewrite the way healthcare is done in the U.S.... against what the majority want.

And how are negotiations behind closed doors getting debates out in the open? There is no open debate with the round of healthcare reform.

And since you admit these may not be good ideas... do you really want to start an entitlement program that will be very difficult to reverse once implemented?

 

[Craig234]

mmm no they are not proposing "new" changes... they are trying to rewrite the way healthcare is done in the U.S.... against what the majority want.

And how are negotiations behind closed doors getting debates out in the open? There is no open debate with the round of healthcare reform.

And since you admit these may not be good ideas... do you really want to start an entitlement program that will be very difficult to reverse once implemented?

No, they're trying to get healthcare reform the people want, and are being blocked by 40 Republican Seenators abusing the rules to need 60 votes, forcing them to all kinds of bad comrromises to get 60.

 

[MotF Bane]

Less taxes, less government, less unions.

Less government? That's a load of bullshit.

 

[Craig234]

Since when is a "check" losing the election so badly you have fewer Senators than the other party has had since 1923, yet demanding to veto all legislation from betting passed by abusing the rules?

If yiou had a clue that wouldn't be a rhetorical question.

"check". Bull. All time record for obstructionism.

The right, as the opposition party, now serves as a check against the left, who still control two branches of the federal government. They are succeeding in that mandate, as evident by the results in MA.


The right is not some hive mind entity.


The harsh slap of reality always hurts more in the morning.

 

[daishi5]

No, they're trying to get healthcare reform the people want, and are being blocked by 40 Republican Seenators abusing the rules to need 60 votes, forcing them to all kinds of bad comrromises to get 60.

If the people want health care reform, wouldn't they have voted against the man who promised to vote against health care reform? If they keep blocking the health care reform that people want, shouldn't we see the people voting for more democrats who support the health care reform?

Even if they are the source of all evil, they still serve as a check on democratic initiatives. The democrats must either create a bill that every democrat believes is good enough to support, or they need a bill so good some republicans need to vote for it to get re-elected.

At the end of the day the republicans only have one thing to sell right now, they didn't vote for the democrats. If their constituents wanted them to vote for the democratic bills, they will remove them from office and put a democrat in power. If they are happy with republican obstructionism, they will keep them.

Unless of course you believe the voters are too stupid to vote for what they want.

 

[Craig234]

If the people want health care reform, wouldn't they have voted against the man who promised to vote against health care reform?

Wow. You asked that?

Do you want the "If the people want health care reform, wouldn't they have elected Obama who ran on it over McCain, and Democrats to Congress who ran on it over Republicans" response?

Or would you rather I just tell you to read the polls?

They'd don't like THIS healthcare bill that Republicans have forced them to move to. They do want healthcare reform that Republicans say no to.

Even if they are the source of all evil, they still serve as a check on democratic initiatives.

There's that wor check again. It's a eupphamism. Since when is a "check" losing the election so badly you have fewer Senators than ther other party has had since 1923 and demanding the right to veto every bill?

The democrats must either create a bill that every democrat believes is good enough to support, or they need a bill so good some republicans need to vote for it to get re-elected.

This is not sarcasm - that's the best rhetorical argument I recall seeing on this point.

It sounds GREAT - 'if the people really want it, just make a bill the people want enough for some Republicans to have to for it to not get replaced'. Nice!

Here's what you're forgetting.

Democrats *already did*. Republicans already lost thos Senators - and more. They are at only *40 Senators* (now 41). That's extremely low. The Democrats haven't had 40% or less since 1923. Our country is more evenly balanced than you think. Therre are Republican areas that are going to vote Republican, poeriod, and even a great bill isn't going to get the people voting Democratic. 55% in this sountry is a big margin - the Democrats have 60%.

What you're forgetting is that you have a great point if the margin were 50-50 - *bit the Democrats already beat all those middle Senators*. They already HAVE a large majority in favor of the bill.

Your suggestion doiesn't apply when were into the hardened Republican last 40, which is where we are, the ones who won't vote for Healthcare period and don't lose elections for it.

Hope you understand that because y our point was good if it were 50-50.

At the end of the day the republicans only have one thing to sell right now, they didn't vote for the democrats. If their constituents wanted them to vote for the democratic bills, they will remove them from office and put a democrat in power. If they are happy with republican obstructionism, they will keep them.

Unless of course you believe the voters are too stupid to vote for what they want.

They're playing a favorite game: break the system and the people in power get the blame.

They tried it with Clinton when they shut down the federal government. They are happy to see any amount of problem and suffering if the result is power.

 

[rudder]

No, they're trying to get healthcare reform the people want, and are being blocked by 40 Republican Seenators abusing the rules to need 60 votes, forcing them to all kinds of bad comrromises to get 60.

woo boy.... no need to provide a rebuttal for that response.

 

[Craig234]

woo boy.... no need to provide a rebuttal for that response.

Actually, there is. It's not the whole story, but it's the biggest part, and the part you don't get.

The Dems could pass this easily with a 50 vote normal process. The pressure to get 60 has led to all kinds of compromises.

Having industry opposition is a big one. Maybe they coud pass it over the industry with 50 votes, but needing 60, it sure elps to have thendustry campaigning FOR the bill.

I don't know Obama's motive, but you just tick your headin the sand on what I posted.

 

[daishi5]

Wow. You asked that?

Do you want the "If the people want health care reform, wouldn't they have elected Obama who ran on it over McCain, and Democrats to Congress who ran on it over Republicans" response?

Or would you rather I just tell you to read the polls?

They'd don't like THIS healthcare bill that Republicans have forced them to move to. They do want healthcare reform that Republicans say no to.




There's that wor check again. It's a eupphamism. Since when is a "check" losing the election so badly you have fewer Senators than ther other party has had since 1923 and demanding the right to veto every bill?



This is not sarcasm - that's the best rhetorical argument I recall seeing on this point.

It sounds GREAT - 'if the people really want it, just make a bill the people want enough for some Republicans to have to for it to not get replaced'. Nice!

Here's what you're forgetting.

Democrats *already did*. Republicans already lost thos Senators - and more. They are at only *40 Senators* (now 41). That's extremely low. The Democrats haven't had 40% or less since 1923. Our country is more evenly balanced than you think. Therre are Republican areas that are going to vote Republican, poeriod, and even a great bill isn't going to get the people voting Democratic. 55% in this sountry is a big margin - the Democrats have 60%.

What you're forgetting is that you have a great point if the margin were 50-50 - *bit the Democrats already beat all those middle Senators*. They already HAVE a large majority in favor of the bill.

Your suggestion doiesn't apply when were into the hardened Republican last 40, which is where we are, the ones who won't vote for Healthcare period and don't lose elections for it.

Hope you understand that because y our point was good if it were 50-50.




They're playing a favorite game: break the system and the people in power get the blame.

They tried it with Clinton when they shut down the federal government. They are happy to see any amount of problem and suffering if the result is power.

Yes, I am serious. This is an election year, if the republicans stop something the voters want I would expect the republicans to lose even more ground. As I said, the republicans are selling themselves as won't vote for the democrat's bills. IF the people are ok with that, the republicans will probably do ok, if they people are not ok with that the republicans will suffer even more.

It is very possible that the democrats will suffer due to the economy, but what economic bills have the republicans stopped? I don't recall any economic initiative that the republicans have blocked like health care. Maybe they did, but they kept it quiet. But again it comes down to the election, if the democrats had a good economic recovery plan and it was blocked by the republicans the democrats ought to be able to wipe the floor with them. If the democrats cannot clearly articulate to the american people why they deserve more seats, and how the republicans have prevented the senate from giving the people what you say they want, then they will fail. But if it is as clear as you think it is, I wouldn't give the republicans a snowballs chance in hell.

I also seem to remember the clinton years as being considered very good from an economic standpoint, and very good for this country in general. If they do the same thing they did during those good years, is that a bad thing?

 

[EXman]

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

As far as I can see the Democrats are at least *trying* to propose some new changes to our health care system, economic policies, etc. They may not be GOOD ideas but at least they are getting the debates out in the open. Even if the ultimate decision is to do nothing the fact that there is open debate can only be a good thing.

If we are not continuously evolving and figuring out how we can better ourselves then tell me what the hell is the point of a Democracy. The Right seems to have this odd nostalgic desire to get back to a time and period that frankly never existed.

haha rewind 4 years swap the names....

Didn't obama say 8 times that the government needs to be more transparent? and that debates would be on C-span and not in back rooms away from the people?

No one knows including most Dems what ALL is in the bill. Repubs didn't have a chance to even get in the room much less offer any ideas. Please grow up and find out what really is happening.

Did you see that Louisianna and Nebraska senators got bought off?

Areyou living the Limosine Liberal or the entitlement-drunk Dem life listen to what is told to you then repeat?

<---- no not a republican

 

[alchemize]

Gridlock, which is OK by me.

 

[Jaskalas]

Other than being against anything the Democrats propose?

Anything the Democrats propose is done through centralized planning. I stand for the rights of the people to determine their own future and not have it determined for them by a distant tyrannical authority.

I stand for agreeing to disagree with how we should live our lives and I implore our state's laws to reflect that and for the "one size fits all" mentality to GTFO before our divide draws blood.