why do republicans have their heads up their as$

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,238
6,338
126
The expression, having your head up your ass applies equally to Democrats and Republicans, in my opinion. I think it might have been chosen unconsciously, however, because of the word 'ass'. Generally speaking, I think, Republicans are more descriptively anal retentive than Democrats.

This is revealed, I think, by their strong emphasis on morals and values. It isn't necessarily that they have better morals, they are certainly inferior in self modesty and self effacement, but that they focus on morality and consequently moral judgment to a far greater degree.

This, I think, is the result of being raised in an authoritarian environment. Republicanism is strongly authoritarian, patriarchal, and punitive. Republicans represent that portion of the population that were most made to tow the line as children under a threat of punishment. This is how they see the world. Everything must have a threat and if it doesn't they fear chaos. Real Liberal thinking is chaotic to them because it does not include threat or fear.

The problem with a moral system that has been inculcated by intimidation is that the underlying urges to do 'evil' are simply repressed rather than outgrown. What Republicans see and fear in Liberals is the havoc they themselves would wreak if their inhibitions failed. This is why, also, I think, you find on the right the greatest resistance to self-analysis.

Psycho-Babble is painted on the door to freedom.
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81
Here is an editorial on the Kyoto Protocol that everyone should read, no matter what their political idealogy is.
 

Tominator

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,559
1
0
Originally posted by: element®
Originally posted by: Tominator
he Reagan tax cuts caused the deficit to explode, and Bill Clinton's economic record has been better than Reagan's.

...Tell me ONE, just ONE thing Clinton did to better our economy...other than ride the coatails of Reagan and Bush...

Tell me ONE, just ONE thing that Reagan did to better the economy...other than ride the coatails of Ford and Carter. See how stupid that sounds?

Reagan ran on the platform of tax cuts and to win the Cold War. He did both! What did Clinton run on? It's the economy stupid! That was his cry. The economy had already started an upswing before most folks had ever heard of Bill Clinton.

Reagan did what he said he would. Clinton bandaided everything from terrorism to the economy, only worried about himself and his now failed legacy.

There were no coat tails to ride on for Reagan. Carter showed how you can fail at being the president and forever wonder why.

 

Staples

Diamond Member
Oct 28, 2001
4,953
119
106
Texas will ALWAYS be republican. Because the people here are uneducated and vote for the party, not for the ideals. They believe what the republicans tell them, because they want to. The democrats have a bad name down here, as do the other 'liberals.'

Its all a big Texas republican conspiracy. Foster the worst kind of education in the schools, and raise a state full of mindless puppets. All the while, pump conservative thoughts into their heads and, 18 years later you have another Republican voter. They will never lose to the democrats or any other party in Texas. The public K-12 schools in Texas show some of the worst results nationwide. I remember hearing we were like 40 out of 50 states.

Yeah, that is really true and sad and the same time. I always vote for the green party in races where I know democratic races have no hope of winning here (San Antonio).
 

SherEPunjab

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2002
3,841
0
0
Originally posted by: Staples
Texas will ALWAYS be republican. Because the people here are uneducated and vote for the party, not for the ideals. They believe what the republicans tell them, because they want to. The democrats have a bad name down here, as do the other 'liberals.'

Its all a big Texas republican conspiracy. Foster the worst kind of education in the schools, and raise a state full of mindless puppets. All the while, pump conservative thoughts into their heads and, 18 years later you have another Republican voter. They will never lose to the democrats or any other party in Texas. The public K-12 schools in Texas show some of the worst results nationwide. I remember hearing we were like 40 out of 50 states.

Yeah, that is really true and sad and the same time. I always vote for the green party in races where I know democratic races have no hope of winning here (San Antonio).


ditto man. i voted green too cuz i was hoping it would get to 5%. A vote for Gore would have been a waste. I didn't like gore much though, I would have preferred Bradley had won the democratic nomination.
 

BDawg

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
11,631
2
0
Originally posted by: Tominator
Originally posted by: element®
Originally posted by: Tominator
he Reagan tax cuts caused the deficit to explode, and Bill Clinton's economic record has been better than Reagan's.

...Tell me ONE, just ONE thing Clinton did to better our economy...other than ride the coatails of Reagan and Bush...

Tell me ONE, just ONE thing that Reagan did to better the economy...other than ride the coatails of Ford and Carter. See how stupid that sounds?

Reagan ran on the platform of tax cuts and to win the Cold War. He did both! What did Clinton run on? It's the economy stupid! That was his cry. The economy had already started an upswing before most folks had ever heard of Bill Clinton.

Really???

"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. He did something about it, fast." 1994 - Former Fed Chair Paul Volcker

"Clinton's 1993 budge cuts, which reduced red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." 5/19/97 - Business Week

"[This is] the best economy ever [because] on the policy side, trade, fiscal and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget defecit. 1998 - Goldman, Sachs & Co.

For all conservative talk about the success of the Regan Admin, they only raised 77,000 people out of poverty.

The Clinton Admin raised 8.2 million out of poverty.

Reganomics helped the rich get richer. There was little trickling down.
 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
Originally posted by: Tripleshot


...Just watch the news in the coming weeks. It's not too popular to support this guy sleeping in the white house now. Politically,he's just too risky.

Ah ha hah ha hah ha... thanks for bringing this thread back up! :D
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Carbonyl
Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Hmm, anybody been paying attention to Texas? Due to failure of Bush's ideas in Texas, the Texas government is currently reversing many of Bush's policies. Coincidently, many of the same policies are still being promoted by Bush. This time not on the State level, but the National level. Hmmm.

You are not from Texas are you? The govenor has remained republican and the legislature is more republican than it was before. Oh and Houston is now the 3rd most poluted City. LA won the title back.

Texas will ALWAYS be republican. Because the people here are uneducated and vote for the party, not for the ideals. They believe what the republicans tell them, because they want to. The democrats have a bad name down here, as do the other 'liberals.'

Its all a big Texas republican conspiracy. Foster the worst kind of education in the schools, and raise a state full of mindless puppets. All the while, pump conservative thoughts into their heads and, 18 years later you have another Republican voter. They will never lose to the democrats or any other party in Texas. The public K-12 schools in Texas show some of the worst results nationwide. I remember hearing we were like 40 out of 50 states.


Very interesting. I beieve the top 5 scoring states are very democratic voting states too. Like MN, VT etc. This may be the first real evidence I have ever seen which party/people actually have the smarter kids.

Only problem is, Texas has had a democratic legislature. It may have changed to republican handsthis election cycle, but I am not sure.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Here is an editorial on the Kyoto Protocol that everyone should read, no matter what their political idealogy is.

And both parties slammed it down it down in the senate 99-0.
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Here is an editorial on the Kyoto Protocol that everyone should read, no matter what their political idealogy is.

And both parties slammed it down it down in the senate 99-0.

and did you actually bother reading my link?
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Here is an editorial on the Kyoto Protocol that everyone should read, no matter what their political idealogy is.

And both parties slammed it down it down in the senate 99-0.

and did you actually bother reading my link?


Yes I did. Kyoto is a bad idea. Saving energy is a good idea. I would support an energy plan that supports new energy sources(renewables for the future, more oilfields for the future) and conservation(tax credits for high effiecent HVAC, high milage cars,....)
 

thomsbrain

Lifer
Dec 4, 2001
18,148
1
0
Originally posted by: christoph83
So your blaiming the economy on Bush when it started in November, When Clinton was in office?

and who did the world know was going to be president by then? bush. the stock markets react to current events.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
Originally posted by: christoph83
So your blaiming the economy on Bush when it started in November, When Clinton was in office?

and who did the world know was going to be president by then? bush. the stock markets react to current events.

Or they could have been reacting to the venture capital that dissappeared, the lack of corperate profits, the bankrupties of many startups, or the beginning uncovery of accounting fraud. Trivial factors compared to who is president
rolleye.gif
 

Tominator

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,559
1
0
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: Tominator
Originally posted by: element®
Originally posted by: Tominator
he Reagan tax cuts caused the deficit to explode, and Bill Clinton's economic record has been better than Reagan's.

...Tell me ONE, just ONE thing Clinton did to better our economy...other than ride the coatails of Reagan and Bush...

Tell me ONE, just ONE thing that Reagan did to better the economy...other than ride the coatails of Ford and Carter. See how stupid that sounds?

Reagan ran on the platform of tax cuts and to win the Cold War. He did both! What did Clinton run on? It's the economy stupid! That was his cry. The economy had already started an upswing before most folks had ever heard of Bill Clinton.

Really???

"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. He did something about it, fast." 1994 - Former Fed Chair Paul Volcker

"Clinton's 1993 budge cuts, which reduced red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." 5/19/97 - Business Week

"[This is] the best economy ever [because] on the policy side, trade, fiscal and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget defecit. 1998 - Goldman, Sachs & Co.

For all conservative talk about the success of the Regan Admin, they only raised 77,000 people out of poverty.

The Clinton Admin raised 8.2 million out of poverty.

Reganomics helped the rich get richer. There was little trickling down.


Clinton cut the military a drastic amount and he DID NOT A THING to raise 8.2 million people out of poverty! Everyone KNOWS that once the military is cut at sometime it will need built back up. That is happening now.

Clinton had no economic policy! Greenspan had much more to do with the success of the economy than Clinton.

Revenue windfalls? They must be living in a different country that I! The debt and the deficit went down because of many economic factors, but Clinton's policies had as little effect as anything I can think of.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,817
2,765
136
Originally posted by: Tominator

Clinton cut the military a drastic amount and he DID NOT A THING to raise 8.2 million people out of poverty! Everyone KNOWS that once the military is cut at sometime it will need built back up. That is happening now.

Clinton had no economic policy! Greenspan had much more to do with the success of the economy than Clinton.

Revenue windfalls? They must be living in a different country that I! The debt and the deficit went down because of many economic factors, but Clinton's policies had as little effect as anything I can think of.
Too bad you can't think or else you might actually try to refute his cited references rather than mouthing off partisan political drivel.
 

Kalvin00

Lifer
Jan 11, 2003
12,705
4
81
Nice way to bump a 1 year+ old thread ;)

And Ameesh, you're an idiot (even though you said that a long time ago, and your view might've changed...but I doubt it)
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Holy old thread, Batman!

Anyway, I completely agree with Ameesh. :D
 

midwestfisherman

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2003
3,564
8
81
Originally posted by: Ameesh
do you conservitive republicans have no foresight?!?

One guys said "who cares about some dumb bears in alaska?"

another says "i love ronald regan"

another says "the kyoto accords , who needs them, i love the greenhouse effect"

yet another says "f-u california"

are you guys just incrediblly stupid or just trolling?!?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
those dumb bears are part of our country why would you want to pollute and destroy the only truelly untouched ecosystem in the conteninatal united states??!?!

ronald regan is a lying bitch who should be shot for the loads of crap he shoveled onto the american public especially the runaway national deficet he so gladly gave us.

bush hates the environments, he is tooo frakin stupid to understand why the kyoto accords were importnat and why the greenhouse affect will hurt the whole world.

and with the california power issues. California has the largest economy of the entire united states. if they go down you will too, no matter where you are. The reprecussions will be felt everywhere


try, please try to have some foresight. care about the earth, care about children, and stop being such money grubbing ($300 is peanuts in a large scheme of things) selfish myopic retards.
we will all regret it if you stay that way.


(if you're wondering)
i consider myself a consrvative democrat. I care about the environment, public education, and equality but i also care about a open and free capatilistic market.

hmmmmmmm........that brings up the question, why are the democrats so out of touch with reality. Big goverment does not equal a better America. Seems to me it's the Dems that have their head up their @sses.
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
He brings up some good points.

It IS mind boggling how some can have such little regard for our environment, and such short sightedness regarding the future.

Instead of being strongly republican, or strongly democratic... why don't we teach our children to be smack dab in the middle, and get rid of both classifications?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,226
5,803
126
Originally posted by: midwestfisherman
Originally posted by: Ameesh
do you conservitive republicans have no foresight?!?

One guys said "who cares about some dumb bears in alaska?"

another says "i love ronald regan"

another says "the kyoto accords , who needs them, i love the greenhouse effect"

yet another says "f-u california"

are you guys just incrediblly stupid or just trolling?!?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
those dumb bears are part of our country why would you want to pollute and destroy the only truelly untouched ecosystem in the conteninatal united states??!?!

ronald regan is a lying bitch who should be shot for the loads of crap he shoveled onto the american public especially the runaway national deficet he so gladly gave us.

bush hates the environments, he is tooo frakin stupid to understand why the kyoto accords were importnat and why the greenhouse affect will hurt the whole world.

and with the california power issues. California has the largest economy of the entire united states. if they go down you will too, no matter where you are. The reprecussions will be felt everywhere


try, please try to have some foresight. care about the earth, care about children, and stop being such money grubbing ($300 is peanuts in a large scheme of things) selfish myopic retards.
we will all regret it if you stay that way.


(if you're wondering)
i consider myself a consrvative democrat. I care about the environment, public education, and equality but i also care about a open and free capatilistic market.

hmmmmmmm........that brings up the question, why are the democrats so out of touch with reality. Big goverment does not equal a better America. Seems to me it's the Dems that have their head up their @sses.

If the Dems were responsible for government growth exclusively, you might have a point.