WP Op-Ed: Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

[Phokus]

Don't care for Reps but someone has to put a stick in the Dems bike wheels. More people than not oppose things like the mandate and the Dems don't care.

Only because a single payer system isn't politically feasible yet (thanks again to obstructionist republicans).

The individual mandate was a conservative idea, BTW (and i'm not even talking about Romney).

The Democrats can't even win with REPUBLICAN ideas about healthcare because of the shitheads sitting on the opposite side.

 

[Genx87]

Genx: Guys, the public totally voted those tea party folks in for smaller government!

*Tea Party votes overwhelmingly for CISPA*

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/27/cispa-passes-the-house-with-tea-party-support/



As if we needed any more proof that the tea party is mostly 'vote the opposite of democrats' and nothing else.

What do you want me to say? Republicans expanding federal govt power? That is unheard of! You born yesterday or something?

 

[Genx87]

This doesn't make any fucking sense whatsoever, the public isn't that forward looking. Also since when does the public want what tea party activists want? Not even TEA party activists want what you think they want. I find it hard to take seriously a 'small government' movement that hates free trade and loves social security/medicare.

They were voted in to be obstructionists until the GOP held complete power and they George Bush up the government again.

This response is baffling. It has nothing to do with what I wrote. Instead it is focussed on attacking the tea party movement as if I was arguing in favor of it.

 

[BoomerD]

It's refreshing that not all anti-Obama folks are batshit insane.

Just a fucking minute...the fact that I'm not an Obama supporter doesn't mean I'm not batshit insane...or that I'm necessarily "anti-obama."

I've voted Democrat in every election since 1972...except for Obama...I just don't trust the guy.

 

[Phokus]

What do you want me to say? Republicans expanding federal govt power? That is unheard of! You born yesterday or something?

Not just REPUBLICANS but a very SPECIFIC type of republicans... TEA PARTIERS. Are you realizing that being for 'big government' but also being 'obstructionist to democrats' aren't mutually exclusive now?

Again, see this (which you keep on ignoring, because it is HIGHLY inconvenient to your narrative about those obstructionist radicalized GOPers):

Then explain how this radicalism is being supported by roughly half the country? Do you understand what mainstream means?

The fact that you are oblivious to what we are talking about is shocking. The GOP is radical in both rhetoric AND action. Obama can't even fucking pass a CONSERVATIVE healthcare bill without the GOP opposing it.

Here's another example:

The GOP and Dems had a deal going where the GOP agreed to some cuts to the military and the Dems agreed to some social spending cuts.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ts-republicans-collide-over-defense-cuts.html

The GOP did an about face and replaced the military cuts with ALL social spending cuts.

If you don't see how this GOP is a radical, uncompromising one, you ARE part of the problem.

Looking to head the defense cuts off at the pass, House Republicans will vote Thursday to reverse and replace them with more cuts to domestic programs, including billions from food stamps, Meals on Wheels, and children's health care, with tort reform for medical malpractice added in for good measure.

It is a fact that the GOP is radicalized and the Dems just roll over for them.

No no, the GOP isn't being radical here, thats what the public wants! - Genx.txt

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Only because a single payer system isn't politically feasible yet (thanks again to obstructionist republicans).

The individual mandate was a conservative idea, BTW (and i'm not even talking about Romney).

The Democrats can't even win with REPUBLICAN ideas about healthcare because of the shitheads sitting on the opposite side.

Neither party knows anything about health care and do not want anyone who does near out, I'm not about to be unhappy that the can't make it even worse. If that changes I'll reconsider.

 

[PokerGuy]

Just absolutely shocking! Idiot dimlibs fail to understand they are the problem, blame GOP for problems. News at 11!

Sheesh. Common guys, you can do better.

 

[Genx87]

Not just REPUBLICANS but a very SPECIFIC type of republicans... TEA PARTIERS. Are you realizing that being for 'big government' but also being 'obstructionist to democrats' aren't mutually exclusive now?

Again, see this (which you keep on ignoring, because it is HIGHLY inconvenient to your narrative about those obstructionist radicalized GOPers):



No no, the GOP isn't being radical here, thats what the public wants! - Genx.txt

I dont think you understood what I said there. I am agreeing with you that Republicans expand the govt powers and start wars. But you are so blinded by your own ideology you cant see it.

More fail from Jokus.txt

 

[Phokus]

Neither party knows anything about health care and do not want anyone who does near out, I'm not about to be unhappy that the can't make it even worse. If that changes I'll reconsider.

Of course undoing what Obama passed and going back to the status quo means eventually healthcare will become a luxury for the very wealthy.

 

[Phokus]

I dont think you understood what I said there. I am agreeing with you that Republicans expand the govt powers and start wars. But you are so blinded by your own ideology you cant see it.

More fail from Jokus.txt

Big Government rhetoric? Read this fucking article:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ts-republicans-collide-over-defense-cuts.html

THIS IS ABOUT A BI-PARTISAN DEAL TO LOWER GOVERNMENT. This was a deal BETWEEN the democrats and GOP to decrease government spending (social spending and military spending). The GOP did an about face and changed the decrease in military spending to MORE social spending cuts. YOU kept on arguing that the GOP wasn't being radical.

Read that fucking article and argue with a straight face they aren't.

 

[fskimospy]

I dont think we are talking past each other. You are focussing on specific instances to prove your point while I am talking in generalities. It is a matter of opinion. I dont see a party that gains roughly half the vote in this country as being outside the mainstream nor radical. It is just a talking point meant to paint the other side as crazy. The mainstream will look past it or vote them out.

But... objective longstanding nonpartisan measures of political ideology show the Republican Party to be currently operating at a level far outside anything that has existed in America during the lifetime of anyone alive today. That's radical by most reasonable definitions I think. The article and I are arguing that they behave in radical ways that are generally not known to the average voter. They are in effect taking advantage of lower voter information levels to drive a radical agenda.

That, and I have to say that I view a significant number of positions held by the current Republican Party (or at least large segments of it) to be insane. The debt default was a prime example of that. I don't think the average voter gets the impact of swamped courts in their day to day life. I don't think the average voter understood what could happen from a US debt default, etc, etc.

 

[Phokus]

And just to underscore how fucking radical the GOP is, Genx, the public OVERWHELMINGLY (democrats AND republicans) want cuts to defense:

http://defense.aol.com/2012/05/10/poll-finds-americans-ready-to-cut-defense-public-ignores-dcs-s/

The most recent evidence of this is in a new report, released today, from the Program for Public Consultation, in cooperation with the Stimson Center and the Center for Public Integrity's National Security Program. The study, based on a complex poll done with a scientifically selected sample poll of 665 Americans), showed that Americans think US defense spending is higher than they thought and that they are prepared to lower it.

Confronted with data that compared defense spending to other areas of discretionary spending, to past levels of the defense budget, or to spending by other countries in the world, significant majorities of the public – Republican and Democrat - said US defense spending was higher than they had expected. Presented with arguments for and against cutting the defense budget, Republicans and Democrats showed they agreed with propositions that pointed in both directions, but clearly in both directions, not just one.

But then, asked whether they would actually cut the defense budget, whether they bought either set of policy justifications, the consensus was striking. As the study stated: "given the opportunity to set a specific overall level for the base defense budget for 2013 a very large majority set levels below the 2012 level, including two thirds of Republicans and 9 in 10 Democrats." On average, the respondents called for reductions that would lower defense spending 22 percent.

This sentiment is consistent with other polling for the past year, revealing the public's willingness to put defense on the table and under the microscope. The polls show that defense-related issues have been replaced by deficits and the economy as the most significant concerns of the American public.

Now again, Genx, tell me with a straight fucking face that the GOP isn't radicalized.

 

[schneiderguy]

There's nothing radical about the current Republican party. The problem is that they're not radical enough. They shifted too far to the left and let the Democrats make the government too big.

 

[Phokus]

This is how compromise works in washington:

Democrats: I'll give up A if you give up B

Republicans: How about you give up A times 2 and go fuck yourselves

Democrats: Ok, sounds like a deal!

Genx: Well, that sounds like a healthy compromise, i don't sense any radicalization in the GOP at all, what are you talking about?

 

[Genx87]

This is how compromise works in washington:

Democrats: I'll give up A if you give up B

Republicans: How about you give up A times 2 and go fuck yourselves

Democrats: Ok, sounds like a deal!

Genx: Well, that sounds like a healthy compromise, i don't sense any radicalization in the GOP at all, what are you talking about?

It is like you havent been paying attention.

 

[Phokus]

It is like you havent been paying attention.

You sure as hell haven't. I'm going to keep reposting this shit just to make you look more and more ridiculous, because these negotiations were based on what **YOU** want: LESS GOVERNMENT, and the GOP STILL found a fucking way to radicalize themselves:

Big Government rhetoric? Read this fucking article:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ts-republicans-collide-over-defense-cuts.html

THIS IS ABOUT A BI-PARTISAN DEAL TO LOWER GOVERNMENT. This was a deal BETWEEN the democrats and GOP to decrease government spending (social spending and military spending). The GOP did an about face and changed the decrease in military spending to MORE social spending cuts. YOU kept on arguing that the GOP wasn't being radical.

Read that fucking article and argue with a straight face they aren't.

 

[Genx87]

But... objective longstanding nonpartisan measures of political ideology show the Republican Party to be currently operating at a level far outside anything that has existed in America during the lifetime of anyone alive today. That's radical by most reasonable definitions I think. The article and I are arguing that they behave in radical ways that are generally not known to the average voter. They are in effect taking advantage of lower voter information levels to drive a radical agenda.

That, and I have to say that I view a significant number of positions held by the current Republican Party (or at least large segments of it) to be insane. The debt default was a prime example of that. I don't think the average voter gets the impact of swamped courts in their day to day life. I don't think the average voter understood what could happen from a US debt default, etc, etc.

I look past that rhetoric. The republicans and democrats play these games with the economy for their own gain. The chances of the govt actually defaulting is really low. They would both like us to believe they are about to commit economic suicide then they both come to terms at the last hour. Amazing how that happens isnt it? Meanwhile both parties get to pretend they are different and point to the other as being crazy or dangerous to americans while they both sign the same paper.

The appointments are all partisan in nature. Bush had nearly 40 appointments blocked over his 8 years. Does that make the democrat radical? Are we goign to call partisan politics radical?

 

[Genx87]

You sure as hell haven't. I'm going to keep reposting this shit just to make you look more and more ridiculous, because these negotiations were based on what **YOU** want: LESS GOVERNMENT, and the GOP STILL found a fucking way to radicalize themselves:

I'd have to ask, do you believe Republicans are a small govt party? It is the only reason why I think you are harping on republicans agreeing to shrink govt and being mad when they tried to weasel their way out of it.

 

[nehalem256]

This is how compromise works in washington:

Democrats: I'll give up A if you give up B

Republicans: How about you give up A times 2 and go fuck yourselves

Democrats: Ok, sounds like a deal!

Genx: Well, that sounds like a healthy compromise, i don't sense any radicalization in the GOP at all, what are you talking about?

You forgot how before the Democratic party demanded and recieved 5 times A.

You act like the Democrats are not radical or disconnected from reality at all when infact

Because there is absoultely nothing radical about redefining marriage 😵

Or normalizing single motherhood 😵

Or believing that women dont need men, and then passing a health care to force men to subsidize health care for women 😵

Or believing that having a child is 100% a woman's choice, but equally a man's responsibility 😵

 

[fskimospy]

I look past that rhetoric. The republicans and democrats play these games with the economy for their own gain. The chances of the govt actually defaulting is really low. They would both like us to believe they are about to commit economic suicide then they both come to terms at the last hour. Amazing how that happens isnt it? Meanwhile both parties get to pretend they are different and point to the other as being crazy or dangerous to americans while they both sign the same paper.

The appointments are all partisan in nature. Bush had nearly 40 appointments blocked over his 8 years. Does that make the democrat radical? Are we goign to call partisan politics radical?

Over the last 3 years Obama has had almost 200 appointments blocked or left in committee limbo. Were that rate to continue that would equal 500+ denied appointments over 8 years. I do think that a 1000%+ increase in appointment blockage would be 'radical'.

Furthermore, if you go back and check on the debt ceiling negotiations you can see that large numbers of Republican House members were absolutely seriously okay with debt default. The Republican leadership was engaging in panicked attempts to educate the new members on the consequences of their vote, with limited success. So sure it wasn't all Republicans, but it was a horrifyingly large number that were either totally ignorant or insane.

 

[Phokus]

I'd have to ask, do you believe Republicans are a small govt party? It is the only reason why I think you are harping on republicans agreeing to shrink govt and being mad when they tried to weasel their way out of it.

LOL, you're the one coming to defense of the GOP saying they AREN'T radicalized.

I don't believe the GOP stands for anything EXCEPT opposing EVERYTHING democrats do, whether it's increasing the size of government or decreasing (as in the fucking example that i showed you and you are unwilling to respond to). Edit: that is the very definition of radical.

 

[Genx87]

LOL, you're the one coming to defense of the GOP saying they AREN'T radicalized.

I don't believe the GOP stands for anything EXCEPT opposing EVERYTHING democrats do, whether it's increasing the size of government or decreasing (as in the fucking example that i showed you and you are unwilling to respond to). Edit: that is the very definition of radical.

kk

 

[Phokus]

You forgot how before the Democratic party demanded and recieved 5 times A.

You act like the Democrats are not radical or disconnected from reality at all when infact

No they don't. Their problem is that they roll over for Republicans.

It's like both dems and repubs are playing a game of chicken, but the republicans pull out the steering wheel and brakes ahead of time.

 

[Phokus]

kk

Yeah i thought so, you got nothing.

 

[Genx87]

Over the last 3 years Obama has had almost 200 appointments blocked or left in committee limbo. Were that rate to continue that would equal 500+ denied appointments over 8 years. I do think that a 1000%+ increase in appointment blockage would be 'radical'.

Furthermore, if you go back and check on the debt ceiling negotiations you can see that large numbers of Republican House members were absolutely seriously okay with debt default. The Republican leadership was engaging in panicked attempts to educate the new members on the consequences of their vote, with limited success. So sure it wasn't all Republicans, but it was a horrifyingly large number that were either totally ignorant or insane.

I was only talking about federal judge appointments blocked during Bush's administration. And have you looked at the list of appointments? 1315 appointments of which right around 1100 have been confirmed or held over. The rest in limbo have been there only a few months with a few being nominated last June. I'd guess in the next few months they should be confirmed. Or maybe after the election.

That is your opinion about the debt ceiling. I called it last Spring nothing would come of it. And fix would be at the 11th hour when congress proclaim doing their jobs is of great accomplishment. These two parties are way to predictable.