• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why Won't Republicans Change They're Spin Even When They're Losing?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
>Hmm, where'd Tex go after his, ahem, mistake was unmasked? <


...to THIS THREAD to get another &quot;unmasking.&quot; 🙂 ...guy puts &quot;Tex&quot; in front of his name and becomes and authority on all things from Texas 😉



 


<< FERC already has secret evidence concerning withholding of power from several energy suppliers to spike prices but they've been sitting on it for over a year doing nothing while certain suppliers, Enron, mainly, are trying to strong arm themselves into new markets such as the deep south by greasing the FERC chairman. >>

If such evidence truly did exist, why don't they present it?!? Why sit on it? I'll tell ya why...

NO SUCH EVIDENCE EXISTS!!!

If they had proof of illegal activity, they would have cause to march to the Feds and the courts and have the smack layethed down on the energy producers. The fact that they're playing the &quot;We know something and we're not telling but it's real bad.&quot; game is more political gamesmanship designed to cover the butts of those who created the mess in the first place.
 
Don't listen to DefNef... errr... i mean DefRef. He thought Libertarians are &quot;more conservative&quot; than republicans and proclaims he is a libertarian himself when in fact Libertarians are liberal in social issues while conservative in fiscal issues (and ironically he changed his tune after someone corrected him and made him look stupid, but insists he had this view the whole time)

Don't even try to deny it DefNef, if i remember correctly, your &quot;liberal/conservative&quot; heirarchy went as follows:

Satan - Communist - Green Party - Democrat - Moderate - Republican - Libertarian - God

Hmm odd, if Libertarians have both Liberal and Conservative views, THEY WOULDN'T EVEN BE ON THIS CHART.

So again, IGNORE ANY POST MADE BY DEFNEF, HE IS IGNORANT IN ALL POLITICAL DEBATES.
 
Def - Once again, you are ignoring the facts. I don't care if you agree or disagree, or if you think there are good reasons, or if others have done similar things.

The facts are that if Republicans reach their goals, access to abortion would be more limited, access to &quot;objectionable&quot; material would be more limited, certain forms of religious expression would be publicly protected to the detriment of other forms, and gays would be less able to choose military careers. No interpretation needed. Republicans state that these results are their intent. Ignore the &quot;justifications.&quot; No matter how you slice, and no matter the reasons for it, people would be subject to greater restrictions and would have less freedom.
 
I can't say that I'm a Republican, but your saying why don't Republicans change their stance now that they're not in power. I think I would call that principles. That says allot about someone when they can't understand why someone else would stand up for what they believe in.
 
Well they arn't losing, in case you noticed they are in power. However they are changing their tactics.
 
Actually, the point here is that Republicans, GWB in particular, decided to rule as if they had a clear mandate after the election. That just was not true. A smarter, more inclusive leadership, and one truly interested in bipartisanship, would adjust its stance to serve the interests of all Americans, not tilt it toward one extreme or the other.
 
No matter how you slice, and no matter the reasons for it, people would be subject to greater restrictions and would have less freedom.

Democrats are against school choice, against school prayer and are for higher taxes which takes money out of people's pockets. It appears that they want to limit people's freedom. You can play this game from any angle.
 
<sigh>...once again, the liberals rely on distortion and misstatement of facts to prop their lame arguments up.

I KNOW that Libertarians are &quot;liberal&quot; in social issues. No one straightened me out. I just didn't state the obvious (to my lasting chagrin) because I didn't think people would be so desperate to make an issue where there wasn't one. Nice try, Phokus, but totally based on unreality. (So what's new with you?)

I personally believe that therte is serious moral decay in our culture, BUT (and this is crucial AND puts the lie to your distortions) I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN DICTATING MORALITY!!!! If you think that I believe otherwise, you're smoking rope!

I support the freedom for people to be idiots and self-destructive if they want to be, PROVIDED THEY DON'T NEGATIVELY IMPACT ON SOCIETY WHILE THEY DO IT! You want to ride without a helmet while smoking a joint with a hooker on the bakc of your Harley? Go for it! But, if you wrack up and crack your head open, don't come looking to me to pay for your hospital bill and rehab. Fair enough?

Liberals are totally fixated on the moral parts of conservativism. They believe that if they don't support hedonism and self-destructive behavior, that they won't be able to have any fun. So, they scream that less freedom will result if the Right is in power, while they try to ban smoking, fatty foods, big cars, etc.

Can you say &quot;HYPOCRITE&quot;?

Didn't think so.

The only reason the GOP is being encouraged to &quot;moderate&quot; their views is because the Left (Dems, media, same thing) knows that if they sell out their conservative base, that they'll stay home and that will allow their coalition of aggrieved moochers to band together and vote away the wealth of the producers.

If they sell out, they'll deserve to lose and I'll be first to vote their lame asses out. I'd rather have the country destroyed by real Democrats than fake ones posing as conservatives.
 


<< the point here is that Republicans, GWB in particular, decided to rule as if they had a clear mandate after the election. >>

Bush was elected because he promised that he was a Uniter, not a Divider(what a joke). Unfortunately, it seems that he is not only having problems with the Democrats and the Western States, he's having problems in his own party. He is starting to look inept and weak.He needs to tell the Right Wing Red Ass Faction of his party to ah heck off and also tell his Handlers like Enron to cut his Marionette Strings and just let him govern whith out them trying to take advantage of him being in office. There was no Mandate, especially for the Ultra Conservative Whacko's.



<< against school prayer >>

Pray at Church and at Home Holy Rollers.



<< but you're gonna have to live in the mess they make AND pay for the promises made to my generation. (Gen X) >>

Ttttttalking bout my generation.Generation Slacker... You guys didn't even vote in significant numbers
 
&quot;Democrats are against school choice, against school prayer and are for higher taxes which takes money out of people's pockets. It appears that they want to limit people's freedom. You can play this game from any angle.&quot;

Total, as I said before, you can accuse anyone you want of anything you like. I assume that your attempts to point out the similarities mean that you agree that Republicans achieving their goals would restrict some of the freedoms that people enjoy today. As I said, forget all the other stuff. In the final analysis, freedom is less.

As for your arguments specifically, I am amazed that you advocate government handouts for school choice. Shouldn't the market decide? Why should the government be giving handouts?

And the opposition to school prayer is a no-brainer. There are multiple cases where it has been struck down as a violation of the Constitution's separation of church and state. In fact, even the conservative members of the current Supreme Court support this view. Nothing stops schools from offering a moment of silence during which students may choose to pray or not pray, and if they choose to pray, to offer any prayer they wish. But the line is crossed if the school chooses to say a prayer aloud and requires everyone, regardless of belief, to have to bear witness.

And please show me where Democrats advocate raising taxes. Last I saw, some opposed the full extent of GWB's tax cutting folly, but it is patently false to suggest that there was any official Democratic party-wide position to increase taxes. You seem to think that such fiction supports the fiction of your argument in general.
 


<<
I KNOW that Libertarians are &quot;liberal&quot; in social issues. No one straightened me out. I just didn't state the obvious (to my lasting chagrin) because I didn't think people would be so desperate to make an issue where there wasn't one. Nice try, Phokus, but totally based on unreality. (So what's new with you?) >>



No you didn't 🙂 You see, you went on parading that Republicans are weak conservatives while Libertarians are stronger conservatives until someone pointed out how ill-informed you were 😉 Even libertarians say they are neither conservative nor liberal, check their website.



<< I support the freedom for people to be idiots and self-destructive if they want to be, PROVIDED THEY DON'T NEGATIVELY IMPACT ON SOCIETY WHILE THEY DO IT! You want to ride without a helmet while smoking a joint with a hooker on the bakc of your Harley? Go for it! But, if you wrack up and crack your head open, don't come looking to me to pay for your hospital bill and rehab. Fair enough? >>



Personal story Def? 😉 The cracked head part would explain a lot 😀



<< Liberals are totally fixated on the moral parts of conservativism. They believe that if they don't support hedonism and self-destructive behavior, that they won't be able to have any fun. So, they scream that less freedom will result if the Right is in power, while they try to ban smoking, fatty foods, big cars, etc. >>



LOL, again, you prove my point.



<< Can you say &quot;HYPOCRITE&quot;? >>



Can you say, uniformed?



<< The only reason the GOP is being encouraged to &quot;moderate&quot; their views is because the Left (Dems, media, same thing) knows that if they sell out their conservative base, that they'll stay home and that will allow their coalition of aggrieved moochers to band together and vote away the wealth of the producers. >>



OOOoooo you brought up the 'liberal media', -2 points for you, GG.

 


<< In addition, there are 9 more...

&quot;Ten prominent economists ? including Paul Joskow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Severin Borenstein of the University of California at Berkeley and Alfred Kahn, the architect of airline deregulation under President Carter ? have sent a letter to the president calling for the federal government to clamp down on wholesale energy prices. Nostrums suitable to the textbook world of perfect competition, they argue, do not fit the messy facts of electricity markets.&quot;


Link >>




I should have been more clear. An economist that specializes in energy. None of those do.
 
The problem is that we have the representation we deserve.

One party advocates never giving anything to widows and orphans and the other party wants to give all of the first party's money to the same widows and orphans.

We should somehow average out to a stable middle ground, but instead we oscillate. That keeps everybody thoroughly ticked off.

Every four years we elect someone who is savior-caretaker-scion to some and hatemonger-idiot-fool to others. We need to grow up and see it for what it is.....

....a morality war, and we are losing it because we have lost respect for everything.
 


<< &quot;The GOP are a pack of lameass, spineless retards. Nuff said. They couldn't screw anything up if they tried, they're so weak. If they had brains and balls, they'd throw that traitor John McCain and the rest of the pansy Northest &quot;Republicans&quot; out of the party and get back to it's core CONSERVATIVE roots of lower taxes, smaller government and more freedom.&quot;

More freedom?

Which party wants to limit access to pornographic material and other stuff it finds morally objectionable?

Which party wants to more actively ban homosexuals from the military?

Which party wants to put more curbs on abortion?

Which party wants to permit Christian religious practices to occur in schools, even if they offend the members of non-Christian religions?

You can agree or disagree with these positions, but the fact is that if Republican goals are achieved, freedom will decline, not expand. >>




LOL Democrats want to force people to accept everyone.

Ask the questions in their TRUE form you get a real picture.

Which party thinks any child should be able to access pronography from any computer?

Which party takes a general prayer without any real demonination and supports the one voice out of 300 and denies the right of the majority?

Which party believes in partial birth abortion where you can kill a baby even being delivered if its still partially in the womb?



Democrats want to expand what they call freedom without looking at the consequences.

BTW, which party wants to restrict the number of guns you own?

I thought Democrats believed in freedom! LOL You are such a hypocrite.
 


<< &quot;which is pretty unbiased being PBS&quot;

You will find lots of people here disagreeing with you. They contend that most media types, PBS in particular, are the tools of the left and that the left and its tools are determined to undermine this God-fearing, chosen society! Of course, these are the same types who are convinced that every room in their homes is bugged by &quot;big brother.&quot; 😉 >>



LOL 88% of Washington Media are regestered Democrats.

Every person on each of the Good Morning America Shows on CBS, NBC, and ABC are regestered Democrats.

All 3 of the nightly news anchors are regestered Democrats.


If you like facts try dodging those and telling all of us the media has no bias LOL
 
Texmaster, what you say about the Democrats could very well be true, but the RatpubliKans are just as hypcritical and pathetic. Niether party has anything top brag about. The RepubliKan party is divided by the Wild Eyed Ultra's like Trent Lott who not only unnerve most Americans, be even those in his own party.
 
Texmaster, what you say about the Democrats could very well be true, but the RatpubliKans are just as hypcritical and pathetic. Niether party has anything top brag about. The RepubliKan party is divided by the Wild Eyed Ultra's like Trent Lott who not only unnerve most Americans, be even those in his own party.
 
Tex - Nice tap dance, but not very convincing.

This doesn't even touch on the riduculousness of an assertion that there really is such a thing as an energy economist. There are certainly economists who work for various different companies that operate in different industries, but they would be the first to tell you that economics doesn't mean a thing if you do not have a macro and micro framework. Nice try, but your statement makes you look even more suspect. And it does not square with your supposed assertion that the person needs to be independent. How could he/she be independent and focus on the energy industry?

Ya gotta read what you write before hittin' that &quot;post&quot; button.
 


<<

<< the point here is that Republicans, GWB in particular, decided to rule as if they had a clear mandate after the election. >>

Bush was elected because he promised that he was a Uniter, not a Divider(what a joke). Unfortunately, it seems that he is not only having problems with the Democrats and the Western States, he's having problems in his own party. He is starting to look inept and weak.He needs to tell the Right Wing Red Ass Faction of his party to ah heck off and also tell his Handlers like Enron to cut his Marionette Strings and just let him govern whith out them trying to take advantage of him being in office. There was no Mandate, especially for the Ultra Conservative Whacko's.



<< against school prayer >>

Pray at Church and at Home Holy Rollers.



<< but you're gonna have to live in the mess they make AND pay for the promises made to my generation. (Gen X) >>

Ttttttalking bout my generation.Generation Slacker... You guys didn't even vote in significant numbers >>



Are you even an American? The &quot;ah heck off&quot; comment tipped my curiosity.

And your school prayer comment is ludicrus. Please explain why when a Mosk or Temple get desecrated the media is all over it and the people are thrown in jail (as it should be) but when a guy in New York defaces over 20 different Cathloic churches gets caught, says he did it because he hates Catholics, a democrat judge not only lets him out but dismisses the case even with a confession.

Face it, the majority of Democrats cant stand Christianity and they fight it whenever they can.
 


<< Texmaster, what you say about the Democrats could very well be true, but the RatpubliKans are just as hypcritical and pathetic. Niether party has anything top brag about. The RepubliKan party is divided by the Wild Eyed Ultra's like Trent Lott who not only unnerve most Americans, be even those in his own party. >>



Funny I give you facts you give me crap straight out of the Liberal Hadnbook. Statements with no fact.

I will give you that both parties have much to learn but to say only one party is hypocritical and pathetic, I think you are having flashbacks. 😀
 
Tex -

&quot;Democrats want to expand what they call freedom without looking at the consequences&quot;

In all the examples you cited, as far as I know, the Democrats have not proposed any expansion of any rights. They already exist. It is Republicans who set goals to restrict these already-existing rights. You really gotta do that readin' and thinkin' thing before you reply.

&quot;Are you even an American? The &quot;ah heck off&quot; comment tipped my curiosity.&quot;

Wow, you criticize someone who you think might not be American? Well, now I think we all see where your respect for others is. You should really stop embarrassing yourself. I guess there are certain states that are more &quot;American&quot; than others too, right?

Edit: fixed typo
 


<< Tex - Nice tap dance, but not very convincing.

This doesn't even touch on the riduculousness of an assertion that there really is such a thing as an energy economist. There are certainly economists who work for various different companies that operate in different industries, but they would be the first to tell you that economics doesn't mean a thing if you do not have a macro and micro framework. Nice try, but your statement makes you look even more suspect. And it does not square with your supposed assertion that the person needs to be independent. How could he/she be independent and focus on the energy industry?

Ya gotta read what you write before hittin' that &quot;post&quot; button. >>



I didnt expect you a Democrat to actually ADDRESS my points. Thats typical. If you actually read it I said quite clearly trhat I should have been more speific about people who actually study energy policies and levels.

LOL OF COURSE there are energy economists! LOL Even the HEAD of California's Energy Department said it isnt the answer! LOL And he's IN California.

How can they be independent? LOL Because they actually make a carrear of watching energy levels and policies governing. Oh come on man you got to do better than that!



 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top