News Republicans no longer a viable party?

[CAC1001]

It is obvious that in order for our government to have revenues to work with, taxes and fees must be levied. The hard-right (which now encompasses most of the mainstream GOP, it seems) denies this, and claims that we must cut taxes to get out of our debt problems. Huh?

The GOP recognizes that much of our problems are also due to spending too much. No amount of money will fix the problem of a government that spends too much. Just look at California's current financial predicament for example. That said, the idea behind the tax cuts many in the GOP are calling for is to reduce rates and simplify the tax code, but end all the various loop holes. That is what was done to a good degree under Ronald Reagan. Some people were ticked off when the top rate was reduced from 70% to 28% because certain loopholes they made use of were closed, and they ended up paying more money to the government.

Bill O'Reilly I know has called for a national sales tax to tap into the underground economy (a trillion dollars he says).

If we look at our household finances (which the GOP continuously holds up as an example of "living within our means"), this would be tantamount to claiming that we would be in better financial shape by reducing our family's income (wage-reduction, or fewer worked hours, perhaps) because that would force us to budget and spend less. That's a pretty stupid idea.

IMO, if a family is spending too excessively and getting themselves into crazy levels of debt, that is precisely one of the things that should be done. Cut their income enough to force them to start living within their means. What the Democrats are suggesting is to give this family that is spending excessively an even higher income to fix their problems. You do that, and you'll only see them get into even higher levels of debt.

There are plenty of things that we can stop spending on (defense, ethanol, mega-farm subsidies, etc come to mind) to reduce spending without FIRST reducing our income. It is sad that our supposedly "liberal" media can't manage to cover this mendacity.

Regarding areas of legitimate waste in defense, I agree with cutting, but many areas of defense need to be increased as it is, not decreased. They can't be done because the money isn't there right now, but cutting those areas would be too dangerous. Defense spending, as a percentage of the GDP, as a percentage of the federal budget, and as a percentage of government spending, is at historical lows as it is. Also, defense is not the main budget buster. You could eliminate the entire defense budget and still not close the deficit.

Ethanol I agree with, but that will never happen because any politician who supports cutting ethanol subsidies slits their throat with the Iowa vote (which I really find dispicable, as are so many Iowans of the mindset that they are entitled to freebies from the government and will punish someone who removes them?). Mega-farm subsidies I also agree with.

 

[CAC1001]

knowing my republican brother's job is being outsourced to India: priceless

Part of free trade.

 

[turbo]

There are some things that money can buy, but the best things in life are when you can just say; "Ha! Ha!"

Years back, I owned one of the first Datsun/Nissan 4x4 pickups in the area. Some of the rabid flag-wavers on the paper machine gave me crap for driving a Japanese vehicle, even though it was built in Smyrna by US workers. Most telling was the fact that I was the only person in the paper machine crew that owned a Harley. Everybody else that had a motorcycle rode Japanese bikes. When one of those jerks gave me crap about my truck, I'd let it ride until a few of their "buy American" friends were present and let them have it and ask them what they were riding.

More recently, I got crap from a brother-in-law for buying a Honda Ridgeline pickup. Clueless, as usual, he had no idea that they are all built here in the US. There isn't a market in Japan for an AWD crew cab 3/4 ton pickup with 5000# towing capacity. The right-wing seems to have managed to tap into knee-jerk nationalism in their base - not that they haven't been working at it for decades.

 

[russ_watters]

I believe every candidate raised their hand. Not one would support any taxes even given a 10:1 deal on spending cuts to tax increases. However, when we consider what the American people want...

So again we see that the entire cast of players is out of step with mainstream America.

Before the election last year, Obama called for an INCREASE in spending. So who'se really more out of step?

It's primary season - it is natural for them to appeal to their base.

 

[turbo]

Before the election last year, Obama called for an INCREASE in spending. So who'se really more out of step?

It's primary season - it is natural for them to appeal to their base.

Russ, that's all well and good during the primary season. What's going to happen to the GOP nominee in the general election when the Dems replay footage from the debate and NO GOP candidate would agree to take a deficit-reduction deal that had 10 parts cost-cutting to 1 part revenue increases?

IMO, Grover Norquist and his ilk are going to radicalize and marginalize the GOP to the point where the past checks-and-balances of a 2-party system will no longer be viable. That's not good for the country.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Before the election last year, Obama called for an INCREASE in spending. So who'se really more out of step?

It's primary season - it is natural for them to appeal to their base.

Since you didn't cite any specific reference and only provided a generic, unsupported allegation, there is no way to even in respond to that statement.

If you mean in terms of stimulus, that isn't a matter of appealing to the base. That is a matter of economics and a struggling recovery. I as much as anyone want to see a reduction in spending and a balanced budget, but how we do that, and how fast, are different matters all together. Drastic spending cuts now could stifle the recovery, reduce growth, and throw us into a double-dip recession. Given the problems in Europe, the situation is still quite critical. For now, and only for now, reduced growth could be far more costly than continued spending. We all know that we need to make major cuts as soon as the economy will allow. And Obama and Geithner are the first to say so.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

IMO, Grover Norquist and his ilk are going to radicalize and marginalize the GOP to the point where the past checks-and-balances of a 2-party system will no longer be viable. That's not good for the country.

My guess: Either the tea party dies, it diverges from the Republicans, or we see a new more moderate party emerge. My vote would be for a new party that pulls moderates from both parties. I would sign on in a heartbeat.

I honestly don't know if the Republican party is even salvageable at this point. I do know that as the party stands, they will never get my vote again. Even for local elections, I may start voting a straight ticket as the norm; except where there are viable Independents.

 

[turbo]

My guess: Either the tea party dies, it diverges from the Republicans, or we see a new more moderate party emerge. My vote would be for a new party that pulls moderates from both parties. I would sign on in a heartbeat.

Between Norquist and the Koch brothers, they will arrange for fringe-y, unknown Tea Partiers to enter the primaries and challenge any GOP incumbent that even thinks about raising taxes. The partisans will buy massive blocks of ads for the TP candidates. In small TV markets like Maine, they might be able to make ad-buys so expensive that incumbents are hard-pressed to keep up.

Our democracy is for sale to the highest bidder, thanks to the Citizens United ruling. If a large group of Republicans told the Tea Party where to go, Norquist and the Koch brothers might not have the resources to challenge them all in the primaries. Unfortunately, those GOP reps and senators want to keep their cushy jobs, their perks, their health-care and retirement, and most of all, those fat "speaking fees" for saying a few words over breakfast to the fat-cats that their most "generous" lobbyists shill for.

 

[WhoWee]

Between Norquist and the Koch brothers, they will arrange for fringe-y, unknown Tea Partiers to enter the primaries and challenge any GOP incumbent that even thinks about raising taxes. The partisans will buy massive blocks of ads for the TP candidates. In small TV markets like Maine, they might be able to make ad-buys so expensive that incumbents are hard-pressed to keep up.

Our democracy is for sale to the highest bidder, thanks to the Citizens United ruling. If a large group of Republicans told the Tea Party where to go, Norquist and the Koch brothers might not have the resources to challenge them all in the primaries. Unfortunately, those GOP reps and senators want to keep their cushy jobs, their perks, their health-care and retirement, and most of all, those fat "speaking fees" for saying a few words over breakfast to the fat-cats that their most "generous" lobbyists shill for.

Care to support your assertions? I could list all of the well known "fat-cat" Left Wingers (like Beck's "scary dude" character?) but you'll just cry not fair - I'll label IMO - and consider your narrative silly as well.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

And there we go. Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll. Who comes in next? Ron Paul!

Watch her lie and obfuscate on Meet the Press this morning.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

This is the woman who, in stark contrast to economists of all brands, argued that we shouldn't raise the debt ceiling, but now says she still would have paid all of the bills. Double-talk through and through. Apparently she skipped math class. It we could pay all the bills without raising the debt ceiling, there wouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

She also now claims that when she says she will be "submissive to her husband", what she really means is that she respects him. So submission and respect are the same thing. Apparently she skipped her English classes as well as her math classes. [Isn't this precisely the sort of definition drift that Orwell talked about?]

I too was once very religious and I know exactly what is meant when a religious [fundamentalist Christian] person talks about women being submissive to their husbands. It means just that - the man is in charge. Apparently she skipped bible study - in particular the part about honesty.


http://www.portlandmercury.com/binary/b131/1312835716-michele-bachmann-newsweek.jpg

 

[Willowz]

Any appeals to Christian values by politicians is utter BS. If these people were true children of the Gospel, they'd all be socialists.

 

[Vanadium 50]

If these people were true children of the Gospel, they'd all be socialists.

I think that's arguable. The case can be made that personal charity is a greater good than state-mandated charity.

 

[WhoWee]

And there we go. Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll. Who comes in next? Ron Paul!

Watch her lie and obfuscate on Meet the Press this morning.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

This is the woman who, in stark contrast to economists of all brands, argued that we shouldn't raise the debt ceiling, but now says she still would have paid all of the bills. Double-talk through and through. Apparently she skipped math class. It we could pay all the bills without raising the debt ceiling, there wouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

She also now claims that when she says she will be "submissive to her husband", what she really means is that she respects him. So submission and respect are the same thing. Apparently she skipped her English classes as well as her math classes. [Isn't this precisely the sort of definition drift that Orwell talked about?]

I too was once very religious and I know exactly what is meant when a religious [fundamentalist Christian] person talks about women being submissive to their husbands. It means just that - the man is in charge. Apparently she skipped bible study - in particular the part about honesty.


http://www.portlandmercury.com/binary/b131/1312835716-michele-bachmann-newsweek.jpg

Personal attacks on women usually indicate fear on the Left - IMO.

 

[OmCheeto]

Years back, I owned one of the first Datsun/Nissan 4x4 pickups in the area. Some of the rabid flag-wavers on the paper machine gave me crap for driving a Japanese vehicle, even though it was built in Smyrna by US workers. Most telling was the fact that I was the only person in the paper machine crew that owned a Harley. Everybody else that had a motorcycle rode Japanese bikes. When one of those jerks gave me crap about my truck, I'd let it ride until a few of their "buy American" friends were present and let them have it and ask them what they were riding.

More recently, I got crap from a brother-in-law for buying a Honda Ridgeline pickup. Clueless, as usual, he had no idea that they are all built here in the US. There isn't a market in Japan for an AWD crew cab 3/4 ton pickup with 5000# towing capacity. The right-wing seems to have managed to tap into knee-jerk nationalism in their base - not that they haven't been working at it for decades.

I just went over the list of cars I've ever owned, there were 4 foreign made, and 4 domestic. My previous 7 were used cars, so I don't see that it made any difference in any nation's economy. When I was shopping for my new car, I was seriously looking at a PT Cruiser. But when I found out they were made in Mexico, it was dropped from my list. My younger brothers job(crane operator in a steel mill) was outsourced to Mexico about 5 years ago. He now mows laws for a living, and I'm quite certain he's one of those people who "doesn't pay taxes" now.

Anyways, I don't have a problem with Mexico, or Mexicans, but I do have a problem with people who are too stupid to realize the effects of their being such cheapskates that they would buy foreign products, which results in the loss of decent paying American jobs, which results in the loss of tax revenue, which results in an increase in our debt, but they vote for people who've signed a pledge of "no tax increases", which only makes matters worse, for everyone. Except for rich people of course. But since we can't define what a rich person is, I guess my point is moot.

ps. I voted for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_H._Smith" in the last election. I'm a bad, bad, democrat.

 

[OmCheeto]

Personal attacks on women usually indicate fear on the Left - IMO.

I would say that personal attacks on idiots indicates intelligence on the part of the attacker, regardless of the attackee's gender, race, and/or choice of breakfast cereals. - IMO

 

[WhoWee]

I would say that personal attacks on idiots indicates intelligence on the part of the attacker, regardless of the attackee's gender, race, and/or choice of breakfast cereals. - IMO

Another personal attack on her? The fear and nervous laughter is a little creepy - IMO.

 

[turbo]

I would say that personal attacks on idiots indicates intelligence on the part of the attacker, regardless of the attackee's gender, race, and/or choice of breakfast cereals. - IMO

How dare you? Who else knew that the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired in New Hampshire, and that the founding fathers worked tirelessly until there was no more slavery in the US? Where can we find her intellectual equal? Perhaps Sarah Palin will agree to take the VP slot, so we can learn more about how Paul Revere rode around ringin' those bells and warning the British...

It's scary that so many ignorant people want to give those loons a shot at running the country. They are dangerously misinformed even about grade-school history.

 

[WhoWee]

How dare you? Who else knew that the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired in New Hampshire, and that the founding fathers worked tirelessly until there was no more slavery in the US? Where can we find her intellectual equal? Perhaps Sarah Palin will agree to take the VP slot, so we can learn more about how Paul Revere rode around ringin' those bells and warning the British...

It's scary that so many ignorant people want to give those loons a shot at running the country. They are dangerously misinformed even about grade-school history.

FEAR is hanging like a thick fog over this thread as the personal attacks continue.

 

[turbo]

FEAR is hanging like a thick fog over this thread as the personal attacks continue.

Quoting their ignorant statements is a personal attack? Let's get real. If Obama had said ignorant patently false things like these two have, you'd be all over him.

 

[Willowz]

The case can be made that personal charity is a greater good than state-mandated charity.

Why should personal charity be a greater good than state mandated charity? Can you provide reasonable justification for this assumption?

 

[WhoWee]

Quoting their ignorant statements is a personal attack? Let's get real. If Obama had said ignorant patently false things like these two have, you'd be all over him.

Should the President of the United States know how many states we have (now) - or is it more important to have a working grasp of 200+ year old dates and events?

 

[turbo]

You know exactly what I mean. Mis-speaking about campaign stops and/or the states and territories one has visited is a whole lot different than being ignorant of grade-school history. If you think that Obama truly doesn't know how many states are in the US, you have clearly drunk the Kool Aid.

I did not attack Bachmann or Palin - just quoted them. You can draw your own conclusions as to whether either if them is the sharpest tool in the shed.

 

[Char. Limit]

Should the President of the United States know how many states we have (now) - or is it more important to have a working grasp of 200+ year old dates and events?

Can we just shut up already about the 57 states mistake? That's what it was: a mistake. You really expect me to think you've never made a mistake? Ever?

Jesus Christ, it was three years ago. And it's brought up by every single conservative in America daily (note: hyperbole). Let it go.

 

[WhoWee]

Can we just shut up already about the 57 states mistake? That's what it was: a mistake. You really expect me to think you've never made a mistake? Ever?

Jesus Christ, it was three years ago. And it's brought up by every single conservative in America daily (note: hyperbole). Let it go.

My point is that Bachman made a mistake as well - it doesn't mean she's incompetent. If it's necessary to lump her together with things Palin has said - then perhaps we need to combine President Obama's words with his Vice President Joe Biden?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

And there we go. Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll.

WTF? She had 13% or something when I looked at CNN the other day?

Double-talk through and through.

And I would add "Double-entry bookkeeping":

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bachmann-20110626,0,7475882,full.story

Bachmann's had her share of government aid - Los Angeles Times

But the Minnesota Republican and her family have benefited personally from government aid, an examination of her record and finances shows. A counseling clinic run by her husband has received nearly $30,000 from the state of Minnesota in the last five years, money that in part came from the federal government. A family farm in Wisconsin, in which the congresswoman is a partner, received nearly $260,000 in federal farm subsidies.

Isn’t it cute? I love this divine truth-teller! :!) ()

http://www.portlandmercury.com/binary/b131/1312835716-michele-bachmann-newsweek.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eesuH_9bSjM

 

[DevilsAvocado]

my brother: republican: July 2011: Works as an engineer for Xerox. Told me his job was being outsourced to India.

Maybe Bachmann could be outsourced to North Korea??

()

 

[DevilsAvocado]

P.S. What happened to this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdA1ikkoEc

The sentiment expressed in that inauguration speech, that the US will continue indefinitely to protect allies now utterly uninterested in protecting themselves is gone.

There must be some misunderstanding... when GWB was in the House, we (Europeans) wondered if we should sell all our stocks in Planet Earth... now when Michele "Government Aid" Bachmann is staring at us – we know that’s the right thing to do.

This is not what I’m talking about. JFK’s speech seems like some wizard wisdom from the future, yet it’s 50 years old. The mantra of today seems to be – "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask how you can burn the damned thing down!"

 

[DevilsAvocado]

.. Actually, didn't Werner Heisenberg win a Nobel?

Yes, but where can you find another eggplant that can cut brush in the hot Texas sun? And you forgot to mention Dick Cheney's "Deficits don't matter".

A hundred years?? That's beyond comprehension. I'm lucky if I can remember what happened last week.

Again. I don't understand. Can you put noodles in coffee too?

Who wrote that commie propaganda? Hang 'em!
...

More seditious commie crap trying to poison our minds with rational thoughts.

How can you love us when we hate each other in the finest American tradition?

No need to worry. Just acquire a taste for noodles and eggplant.

Who's he? Sounds like some foreigner with a funny accent trying to tell us what to do.

EDIT: By the way, Michele Bachmann is a tax lawyer who worked for the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Anyone who immerses themselves in US tax law too long can be excused if they longer can think rationally. They're lucky if they can think at all.

HAHA LOL! With this kind of excellent humor maybe everything will be okay!

 

[Proton Soup]

There must be some misunderstanding... when GWB was in the House, we (Europeans) wondered if we should sell all our stocks in Planet Earth... now when Michele "Government Aid" Bachmann is staring at us – we know that’s the right thing to do.

This is not what I’m talking about. JFK’s speech seems like some wizard wisdom from the future, yet it’s 50 years old. The mantra of today seems to be – "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask how you can burn the damned thing down!"

nothing is harder to put out than a Greece fire, eh?

 

[turbo]

Maybe Bachmann could be outsourced to North Korea??

()

If she would take Palin, then Palin might actually be able to see Russia from her house.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

If she would take Palin, then Palin might actually be able to see Russia from her house.

MUHAHAHA!

This getting better and better! 10++

 

[DevilsAvocado]

nothing is harder to put out than a Greece fire, eh?

Yeah, I know exactly what you’re talking about... compared to Greece... well, you’re all in Disneyland over there. You don’t have any (real) problems, yet (but it will come if you don’t do something).

EU is a freaking academic kindergarten for overpaid adults that never had a "real" job in their entire life, IMHO. They try to 'play' "The United States of Europe", but someone forgot to bring all the rules, before starting, and now we’re f**ked up. Greece is going to burn down... no doubt about it.

However I live in the Kommunismus Kingdom of Schweden, and we voted NO to EMU (Euro), that is "We the People" (as Ted Nugent would have said ), not because we don’t want to play with Berlusconi, but because it was easy to see that "the rules" wasn’t thought thru all the way.

The finance people called the NO voters – "Unemployed communists living on welfare above the Polar Circle"

They are very quiet today...

But when Greece goes, we all go, and probably to some extent even you guys over there.

That’s why this "dysfunctional mess" couldn’t have come at a 'better' moment...

*sigh*


P.S. Giorgos Papandreou doesn’t have the A-bomb, the only good thing at the moment...

 

[CAC1001]

What gets me with the media publication such as Newsweek is I remember reading somewhere where journalists were saying they expect the American people to trust them to report objectively on the different issues, but then they go and do blatantly biased things (such as the Michele Bachmann cover photo). No need to resort to such things to levy legitimate criticism on the woman.

 

[turbo]

What gets me with the media publication such as Newsweek is I remember reading somewhere where journalists were saying they expect the American people to trust them to report objectively on the different issues, but then they go and do blatantly biased things (such as the Michele Bachmann cover photo). No need to resort to such things to levy legitimate criticism on the woman.

Do you remember a rather unflattering picture of a male Democratic presidential candidate hitting all the rags a while back? Hint: he was prominent in Dem national politics in the last few years. The TV networks all picked up his screaming to his supporters and ran it over and over.

Yep! The "liberal" media only paints conservative women in unflattering lights.

 

[CAC1001]

Do you remember a rather unflattering picture of a male Democratic presidential candidate hitting all the rags a while back? Hint: he was prominent in Dem national politics in the last few years. The TV networks all picked up his screaming to his supporters and ran it over and over.

Not sure which one you are referring to, but now that you mention it, I do remember this cover from (although I do not think was ill-intentioned on the part of The New Yorker as it endorsed Barack Obama):

 

[turbo]

No, it was Howard Dean, urging his supporters on after a 3rd-place finish in Iowa.

 

[CAC1001]

Ahhh, okay, yeah, Howard Dean, I remember seeing that. I was talking more about photos on magazines though. I also don't think the Left in the media were too concerned about Howard Dean as they had Hillary and Obama as their top picks.

 

[turbo]

Ahhh, okay, yeah, Howard Dean, I remember seeing that. I was talking more about photos on magazines though. I also don't think the Left in the media were too concerned about Howard Dean as they had Hillary and Obama as their top picks.

Stills from that rally were all over the magazines, papers, etc all over the country, and that scream was practically being looped on FOX.

 

[OmCheeto]

And there we go. Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll. ...

If it's any consolation to everyone on the planet, here are the results of the Ames Straw Polls from it's inception:

Year... A.S.P. winner ... Elected President
1980... Bush, George H. W. ... Ronald Reagan
1988... Robertson, Pat ... George H. W. Bush
1996... Dole, Bob ..... Bill Clinton
2000... Bush, George W. ... George W. Bush
2008... Romney, Mitt ... Barack Obama
2012... Bachmann, Michele ... TBD​

And what were the results of the 2000 election again?

2000 election .. G.W. Bush ... Al Gore
Popular vote ... 50,456,002 ... 50,999,897​

So they've got a zero percent batting average.

There is a god (and may she smite Sarah Bachmann with a pox and some randomly placed boils...)

 

[Proton Soup]

Do you remember a rather unflattering picture of a male Democratic presidential candidate hitting all the rags a while back? Hint: he was prominent in Dem national politics in the last few years. The TV networks all picked up his screaming to his supporters and ran it over and over.




Yep! The "liberal" media only paints conservative women in unflattering lights.

that's right, it's not the liberal media, it's the establishment media. and they LOVE war.

that Dean scream is still funny, btw. maybe not fair, but to be honest, the reason it doesn't play very well is that it doesn't come across as particularly male.

and speaking of protecting your image, here's another blast from the past that came back to haunt a candidate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X244jadVnRU

 

[turbo]

that's right, it's not the liberal media, it's the establishment media. and they LOVE war.

that Dean scream is still funny, btw. maybe not fair, but to be honest, the reason it doesn't play very well is that it doesn't come across as particularly male.

and speaking of protecting your image, here's another blast from the past that came back to haunt a candidate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X244jadVnRU

Ah yes, the Dukakis tank scene. If he hadn't been a conservative woman, the media would have given him some space.



NOT! There is a whole lot of history-blind revisionism being perpetrated by the right, instead of making fair appraisals of candidates' positions. Of course, rational discourse doesn't sell a lot of commercials.

 

[OmCheeto]

...

Perhaps one of their Presidential candidates is fit to hold office - Romney. The rest are either fringe [eg Bachman] or could never get nominated [eg Huntsman].

Do you still feel that way after Romney's "exchange" the other day?

“Corporations are people, my friend,” Mr. Romney responded, as the hecklers shouted back, “No, they’re not!”

“Of course they are,” Mr. Romney said, chuckling slightly. “Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/us/politics/12romney.html"

Well, after googling and doing some research, I've found that the money is just sitting there, doing nothing:

# Back in the U.S., companies are squeezing more productivity out of staffs thinned out by layoffs during Great Recession. They don't need to hire. And they don't need to be generous with pay raises; they know their employees have nowhere else to go.

# Companies remain reluctant to spend the $1.9 trillion in cash they've accumulated, especially in the United States.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43860044/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/boom-corporate-profits-bust-jobs-wages/"

$1.9 trillion? Math time! $1.9e12/($40,000/year salary) = 47,500,000 people? vs unemployment rate: 13.9 million http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm"
That can't be right. Someone check my math.



But Romney did have some good advice at the end:

When he realized he wasn’t changing any hecklers’ minds, he said they were free to vote for someone else. “I’m not going to raise taxes — that’s my answer,” he said. “And if you want someone who can raise taxes, you can vote for Barack Obama.”

Ok then, I will.

 

[daveb]

Yes there is. The fact that almost every time in recent history tax increases are agreed to with corresponding spending cuts, the cuts never occur. So why agree to tax increases if spending cuts are promised when the cuts likely will not occur?

By that logic, why agree to spending cuts if they never occur anyway, and just try to figure a way out without spending cuts?

 

[daveb]

Why should personal charity be a greater good than state mandated charity? Can you provide reasonable justification for this assumption?

His point is that it's more moral to want to donate than to be forced to donate.

 

[daveb]

Yep! The "liberal" media only paints conservative women in unflattering lights.

The media paints anyone they can in an unflattering light so as to sell more of their product to a society all too eager to gobble it up.

 

[Char. Limit]

daveb, there's a multi-quote button in the bottom right of every post that I think might be helpful to you here.

 

[CAC1001]

Russ, that's all well and good during the primary season. What's going to happen to the GOP nominee in the general election when the Dems replay footage from the debate and NO GOP candidate would agree to take a deficit-reduction deal that had 10 parts cost-cutting to 1 part revenue increases?

This one I'd think should be very simple to answer. The GOP candidate should just point out when taxes are increased, the corresponding spending cuts virtually never occur.

IMO, Grover Norquist and his ilk are going to radicalize and marginalize the GOP to the point where the past checks-and-balances of a 2-party system will no longer be viable. That's not good for the country.

This has been being said about the Republican party for the past fifty years or so.

Our democracy is for sale to the highest bidder, thanks to the Citizens United ruling.

No it isn't. Citizen's United only allows for unlimited spending by corporations in elections (and only for domestic corporations at that I believe; foreign corporations are banned from engaging in unlimited spending, and there are other laws that limit foreign influence in American elections). It did not undo the law that prevents corporations from making unlimited donations to a politician's campaign.

 

[mheslep]

... foreign corporations are banned from engaging in unlimited spending, and there are other laws that limit foreign influence in American elections). It did not undo the law that prevents corporations from making unlimited donations to a politician's campaign.

For that matter foreign anything (individual, corporation, nation) is banned from funding US political campaigns.

 

[moejoe15]

Of course the republican party is viable. Look at how it has evolved to bear almost no resemblance to the values it once had. It has been hijacked by religious zealots who would like nothing better than to hurry the apocalypse along so they can disappear in the rapture. If Americans think Obama is bad, wait till a Perry, Palin or Bachman gets in the white house. Our forefathers were religious and sprinkled government with references to god yet they still knew that mixing politics and religion was a bad idea. That seems to be lost on us now.

 

[mheslep]

Of course the republican party is viable. Look at how it has evolved to bear almost no resemblance to the values it once had. It has been hijacked by religious zealots who would like nothing better than to hurry the apocalypse along so they can disappear in the rapture. If Americans think Obama is bad, wait till a Perry, Palin or Bachman gets in the white house. Our forefathers were religious and sprinkled government with references to god yet they still knew that mixing politics and religion was a bad idea. That seems to be lost on us now.

In referencing 'party' I assume you mean this characterization is pervasive, widespread among Republicans:

The highest ranking Republican politicians in the US now are Speaker Boehner and Minority leader Senator McConnell. Please demonstrate how you known they plan to hurry the apocalypse. Or, if by 'hijacked' you mean recently elected officials we can examine them. From the 2010 elections in the Senate the freshmen are Boozman, Rubio, Coats, Moran, Paul, Blunt, Ayotte, Hoeven, Portman, Toomey, Lee, Johnson, and there are some ~80 freshmen Republicans in the House from 2010. Among them all: no Jerry Falwell (dead), no Pat Robertson. Please demonstrate how these officials express their religious zealotry; surely they have made some speeches far more religous than, say, http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres32.html" ("...the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.")?

Now, perhaps the above damnation of Republicans was not meant to be taken literally, as an observation of reality; instead it may well be that the post derives from a strongly held belief on this subject, something taken on a faith gathered from family, friends, or even a political evangelist who sends letters containing fire and brimstone warnings about Republicans and asking for donations to the cause. In that case, Amen?

Oh, ps: Palin holds no office, is running for no office.