I'm conservative and...
Fuck libertarianism. It's great if we all live in a perfect society. Oh what the fuck am I saying? Even then it's not.
Sarah Palin is a twit.
Mike Huckabee is a loon and fuck big government
Minimalist Government FTW!
Glenn Beck is a tool as well.
TheBlackStallion is hysterical
Does this mean you'll stop spamming smokescreen topics? cool
Fuck politics and fuck political threads and fuck the people who post in them.
Fuck politics and fuck political threads and fuck the people who post in them.
So basically your telling yourself to fuck yourself? :lol :lol :lol
TheBlackStallion is hysterical
Go make your own thread just for Liberals.Does this mean you'll stop spamming smokescreen topics? cool
Go join him.
TheBlackStallion is hysterical
Go make your own thread just for Liberals.Does this mean you'll stop spamming smokescreen topics? cool
Go join him.
Who said I'm a liberal? There is currently zero credibility to be found in the Republican party or 'conservative movement' so I vote Democrat for now.
I saw that one coming while I was typing that post. And guess who the owner of that shitpost is? The creator of the shitthread.
Fiscal conservative mostly. I think paying off the national debt and minimalizing government should be top priority (in most cases). I do believe in a hands off approach for private life and businesses with exceptions (the current economic mess being one). However, I don't really find many mainstream GOP leaders with it as an actual top priority and the few that do usually have other nutjob ideas (Ron Paul and his gold standard).
May I ask what type of conservatism you support? Just curious.
Can you read? "I'd like to start the thread by discussing where the Republican party should go as its obvious a change is needed.
No one cares what you are. Did you come here to discuss or troll?
I saw that one coming while I was typing that post. And guess who the owner of that shitpost is? The creator of the shitthread.
So if you hate political threads, then don't read/post in them. Simple enough.
Fiscal conservative mostly. I think paying off the national debt and minimalizing government should be top priority (in most cases). I do believe in a hands off approach for private life and businesses with exceptions (the current economic mess being one). However, I don't really find many mainstream GOP leaders with it as an actual top priority and the few that do usually have other nutjob ideas (Ron Paul and his gold standard).
May I ask what type of conservatism you support? Just curious.
If Michael Savage wasn't such a nutjob regarding foreign policy in general, I'd probably be in line with him.
I saw that one coming while I was typing that post. And guess who the owner of that shitpost is? The creator of the shitthread.
So if you hate political threads, then don't read/post in them. Simple enough.
how about you log off and never return again? Simple enough.
TheBlackStallion is hysterical
Go make your own thread just for Liberals.Does this mean you'll stop spamming smokescreen topics? cool
Go join him.
Who said I'm a liberal? There is currently zero credibility to be found in the Republican party or 'conservative movement' so I vote Democrat for now.
Can you read? "I'd like to start the thread by discussing where the Republican party should go as its obvious a change is needed."
No one cares what you are. Did you come here to discuss or troll?
Fiscal conservative mostly. I think paying off the national debt and minimalizing government should be top priority (in most cases). I do believe in a hands off approach for private life and businesses with exceptions (the current economic mess being one). However, I don't really find many mainstream GOP leaders with it as an actual top priority and the few that do usually have other nutjob ideas (Ron Paul and his gold standard).
May I ask what type of conservatism you support? Just curious.
If Michael Savage wasn't such a nutjob regarding foreign policy in general, I'd probably be in line with him.
Uh it appears that Ganhyun cares what I am, he tried to eject me from the thread.
The poll in the first thread shows no credible ideas and it's sourced from this country's most embarrassing public figure. It's exactly the reason I don't lean Republican anymore - there's nothing to put in this thread except NBC conspiracy theories and videos of people dumping gasoline on their guests.
All I have to say is watching the complete failure and collapse of the GOP in which they have no ideas other than screaming "NO!", no idea where to go and no real leader in this Obama era is highly entertaining.
I guess If I had to pick a reasonable conservative, that leaves McCain's daughter? Everyone who disagrees with her should be purged from the party. Does that help?
I guess If I had to pick a reasonable conservative, that leaves McCain's daughter? Everyone who disagrees with her should be purged from the party. Does that help?
McCain's daughter is a tool riding the waves of the liberal media simply because she bashes conservatives. And I agree with her socially, but I've heard her say nothing credible fiscally.
You said that this topic was for conservatives. As a former Republican-leaning individual and someone sympathetic to some ethereal notion of conservatism, it seemed like it was for me!
Then you posted a poll with Paul, Palin, and Huckabee and reminded me that there is really nothing modern or substantive or realistic that could be in this thread. I can't think of a high profile Republican that doesn't support at least 30% batshit crazy or hypocritical policies.
Completely agreed.Fiscal conservative mostly. I think paying off the national debt and minimalizing government should be top priority (in most cases). I do believe in a hands off approach for private life and businesses with exceptions (the current economic mess being one). However, I don't really find many mainstream GOP leaders with it as an actual top priority and the few that do usually have other nutjob ideas (Ron Paul and his gold standard).
May I ask what type of conservatism you support? Just curious.
If Michael Savage wasn't such a nutjob regarding foreign policy in general, I'd probably be in line with him.
That's spot on with me mostly. Socially I'm not for judging anyone. Everyone's private life/home life is their own. I agree with Ron Paul on some issues though such as shutting down the military bases over seas. We're wasting far too much on the empire protecting nations that should be protecting themselves.
The Five Strands of Conservatism: Why the GOP is Unraveling
In one sense, it isn't hard to see why the Republican Party seems to be coming apart at the seams. When you get caught gutting the regulations that had kept us for 70 years from another stock market crash like the crash of 1929 and another collapse of the banking system like the one that occurred during the Great Depression, and when your policies throw millions of people out of their homes, jobs, retirement, and doctors' offices, the next bottle of elixir you sell is not likely to fly off the shelf, especially if it's the same whine in a new deCantor.
But at a deeper level, the modern conservative movement, which eventually came to define the GOP (to its benefit for many years), was built on an ideological foundation--and a coalition--that was fundamentally incoherent. It took a charismatic leader to bring it together (Ronald Reagan), a tacit agreement among its coalition partners to give each other what they wanted, and a message machine to start selling the idea that that there was coherence to a conservative "philosophy" that was anything but coherent.
Modern conservatism wove together five discrete strands and interest groups that couldn't coexist. What is remarkable is how well it held together despite the fact that those strands were actually difficult to interweave.
The first strand is libertarian conservatism, reflected in leaders from Barry Goldwater to Ron Paul. Libertarian conservatives believe government should be small and weak and kept that way through low taxes. From their point of view, the primary role of government is to police the streets, protect private property, and protect the country from external threats (although at times they can get a little histrionic about internal threats as well).
The second strand, with which libertarianism is entirely incompatible, is social conservatism, particularly Christian fundamentalism. Fundamentalists of any sort believe that they have privileged knowledge of God's Will and hence have the right to use whatever methods available--including the instruments of state--to impose that will on others. It is one thing to believe, as many democratic (and increasingly Democratic) evangelical Christians and conservative Catholics do, that life begins at conception. It is another to believe that because you believe that, you have the right to impose your interpretation of the books you consider holy on others who may not share your faith or your interpretation of Scripture. The fundamentalist politics practiced by the likes of Falwell, Robertson, and Dobson over the last 30 years should have been anathema to genuine libertarians, because they run against everything libertarian conservatives believe in vis-à-vis intrusive government. However, the two groups lived happily together as long as libertarians got to keep their taxes low and their rifles loaded and fundamentalists got to keep their kids from learning anything about birth control (leading the Bible Belt to have the highest rates of teen pregnancy and abortion anywhere in the country, although Sarah Palin seems to be leading a one-family crusade to recapture for Alaska the title of Miss Teen Pregnancy).
The third strand of conservatism is old fashioned fiscal conservatism--the kind that once led Bob Dole to garner his party's nomination for president but would make him unwelcome in the contemporary GOP. Fiscal conservatives are essentially soft New Dealers, who accept the premises of the New Deal--that we need a safety net, that when people lose their jobs because of economic downturns they shouldn't lose their homes, that people deserve some minimal degree of dignity in old age if they worked hard for 40 years--but prefer the safety net and tax codes to be thin. Fiscal conservatism bears no logical relation to social conservatism, and although it bears a superficial resemblance to libertarian conservatism, the two are fundamentally at odds, with one accepting the premises of the New Deal and the other rejecting them.
The fourth strand, national security conservatism, is a different breed. National security conservatives tend to be hawkish (although they have a curious habit of evading military service when it comes their turn), and they are generally quick to accuse others of being soft on the threat du jour (unless the other side happens to be in an interventionist mood, in which case they often morph into isolationists just for sport, as when George W. Bush attacked Clinton and Gore for "nation building" and then went on a six year binge of it). The militarism of national security conservatism is as far at odds from evangelical Christianity (and hence social conservatism) as it could be, given that Jesus preached most about the evils of war, poverty, and public expressions of piety, but somehow Christian social conservatives have found a way to rationalize militarism (not to mention ignore the plight of the poor or blame them for their poverty and build crystal cathedrals). Indeed, fundamentalist Christians were the strongest supporters of the Iraq War of any demographic group other than the Bush and Cheney families.
The final strand of conservatism is the one Nixon exploited with his Southern Strategy and the Republicans have exploited ever since, whether the issue is voting rights, "welfare queens," affirmative action, or the fate of "illegals": prejudice, whether conscious (as when Reagan and Nixon used, let's say, "colorful" terms, to describe those on welfare) or unconscious (as when Bob Corker ran a race against Harold Ford, a black Congressman from Tennessee, asking, "Who's the real Tennessean?", when what he was really activating in the back of voters' minds was, "he's not really one of 'us,' now is he"?). Given that most white Americans no longer see themselves or want to see themselves as racist, and that they actually consciously eschew racist sentiments and actions such as overt discrimination against people because of the color of their skin, emotional appeals to this segment of the conservative population tend to be strongest when a conscious "text" with some merit (e.g., we can't simply open the floodgates to all who would want to enter the United States and become citizens) is superimposed on the unconscious "subtext" of prejudice (the people flooding in happen to have dark skin). Although it's easy to localize this strand of conservatism as Southern, given that the GOP has become a regional party, it is important to note that had the Presidential election only included white voters (the Republicans' fantasy), McCain would have won in a 63-37 landslide over Barack Obama. But conservatives don't have much on their side on this one either, except to the extent that they can block the vote, because demographics are running in the wrong direction for them over the next 50 years.
I would never underestimate the ability of the right to find a way to stitch something back together, for two reasons. First, they're good at it. They're short on ideas, but they're long on selling ideas, however vapid. Second, Democrats are exactly the opposite: They're long on ideas but short on the ability to bundle them into coherent, emotionally compelling narratives that make people want to buy them--except when the GOP is so corrupt, inept, and/or bankrupt (or causing bankruptcy) that even moderate Republicans jump ship.
The reality is that it's going to be difficult to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, and it's going to take someone with vision and charisma to figure out which aspects of conservatism to bring back into the center and which to catapult without losing a base that is now seriously out of step with mainstream America. I don't see that leader in Bobby "let me tell you a story about my dad and how in America, anything is possible" Jindal, Tim "let me tell you a story before you fall asleep and I have to certify Al Franken" Pawlenty, and Sarah "let me tell a lot of stories and hope no one checks the facts" Palin.
Faux tea parties aren't going to get them there, either (and if you ask me, they seem more than a little elite (tea?) and, well, gay (don't real men drink beer?) for a Party determined to "save the institution of marriage." But perhaps as they clink their porcelain cups in unison for high tea, they'll have an epiphany about how to replace their predictable and carping Constant Comments about taxes and deficits with a new blend. Perhaps they could borrow some green tea from the President.
It isn't just how liberals feel. I bet if you did a poll amongst independents they'd agree the GOP has no ideas.All I have to say is watching the complete failure and collapse of the GOP in which they have no ideas other than screaming "NO!", no idea where to go and no real leader in this Obama era is highly entertaining.
Yes yes, we know thats how all Liberals feel. This thread is for Conservatives to discuss what path the party needs to take.
It isn't just how liberals feel. I bet if you did a poll amongst independents they'd agree the GOP has no ideas.All I have to say is watching the complete failure and collapse of the GOP in which they have no ideas other than screaming "NO!", no idea where to go and no real leader in this Obama era is highly entertaining.
Yes yes, we know thats how all Liberals feel. This thread is for Conservatives to discuss what path the party needs to take.
Whats the GOP plan on making sure every american has healthcare?
Whats the GOP plan on fighting global warming?
Whats the GOP plan on fixing our relations with world leaders who don't like us thanks to Bush?
Even McCain's own campaign manager says the GOP stands for nothing but "no" right now.
It isn't just how liberals feel. I bet if you did a poll amongst independents they'd agree the GOP has no ideas.All I have to say is watching the complete failure and collapse of the GOP in which they have no ideas other than screaming "NO!", no idea where to go and no real leader in this Obama era is highly entertaining.
Yes yes, we know thats how all Liberals feel. This thread is for Conservatives to discuss what path the party needs to take.
Whats the GOP plan on making sure every american has healthcare?
Whats the GOP plan on fighting global warming?
Whats the GOP plan on fixing our relations with world leaders who don't like us thanks to Bush?
Even McCain's own campaign manager says the GOP stands for nothing but "no" right now.
I agree the GOP has basically no ideas except shouting NO right now. Thus why this thread was made ;)
I'm not a conservative, but I would like an opposition party that would call out corruption, waste, and ham-fisted broken regulations. The problem is that the current Republicans are apparently incapable of distinguishing real waste from sins against their idiotic cultural prejudices, or from shit they just made up, so we get OMG SOMETHING CALLED VOLCANO MONITORING and OMG HIGH-SPEED RAIL FROM DISNEYLAND TO BUNNY RANCH and any real problems get lost in the noise (plus they probably often shy away from going after corruption because they're implicated in it too)To be fair the democrats in the Bush years weren't a good opposition party either. Instead of feigning outrage at every little thing the democrats in congress just stuck their head in the ground and waited till Iraq imploded badly enough that they swept into power in 2006 without really having to do anything. They were too scared shitless to go after Bush in the early years on much at all. The GOP's problem is ironically going in the complete other direction and going after on Obama on every little thing so the "important" stuff to challenge gets lost in the shuffle.
In other words you yearn for the return of Teddy Roosevelt republicansThat would never happen. Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive who was obsessive about the environment (Congress had to put a restriction on how many places a president can name a national park because Teddy wouldn't stop making them).
me too :'(
You can see Cheebs coming miles ahead. Whenever there's a shitty political thread on the internet, he jumps on it like the little distinguished effete fellow he is.
I don't know if I'm conservative or liberal. I agree with some views of both. I'm middle of the road.
1) Feigned outrage
2) Short-term memory loss
3) TAPPER TAPPER TAPPER TAPPER
4) Milf-hunting (http://www.evilbore.com/forum/index.php?topic=24472.msg630063;topicseen#msg630063)
I don't know if I'm conservative or liberal. I agree with some views of both. I'm middle of the road.
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
Write it down: Himu's gonna announce he's bisexual this year
Get out of our thread, malacious liberals!
Write it down: Himu's gonna announce he's bisexual this year
Ya but he'll say it like this
'I don't know if I'm gay or straight. I am attracted to some things of both. I'm the middle of the sandwich.'
GLENN: You know, I have to tell you, the answer is to get away from the two-party system because they are both progressives. Just progressive and progressive light. But they're both progressives and they have been taking us down this road for over 100 years.
Judge: I heard your intro and I, of course, fully endorse it that the two‑party system is one version of big government versus another version of big government
GLENN: You are exactly right. So the constitutional amendment, and even if this doesn't work, because this is going to sound crazy to some people. I don't think it is. I think even if it doesn't go through, it is the push for it if there is a serious movement in the public to push for this, it threatens their very existence and they will have to move. So explain it.
JUDGE NAPOLITANO: If 2/3 of the states ask the congress to call a Constitutional Convention to consider the adoption of this amendment which I'll describe in a moment, as it gets closer and closer to the 2/3 necessary and congress would be required to call the convention, you'll see some reaction on the part of congress to attempt to placate the states that want to call this. Now, the constitutional amendment is a simple one. It simply abolishes the 16th amendment and states affirmatively that congress shall have no power to tax the personal incomes of individual persons. If that were enacted, it would starve the federal government back into the original footprint that the founders intended for it. But as it gets closer to enactment, congress will have to do something for fear that it might be enacted.
JUDGE NAPOLITANO: Let me tell you about another movement that's out there, Glenn, and this is something that was debated by the founders before and since the Civil War and it's called nullification. It's where a state legislature says the federal law that says ABC ‑‑ and I'll give you a few examples ‑‑ shall not be recognized in this state. Now, so far the nullification is in minor things. Arizona and Indiana have nullified the federal law on Daylight Savings Time. California, and New Jersey is about to do this, have nullified medical law on medical marijuana. Montana, this afternoon the governor of sign into law a law nullifying the federal regulation of firearms that are built, sold and used exclusively within the State of Montana.
GLENN: This is Montana? I know that was happening in Texas. That just happened in Montana?
JUDGE NAPOLITANO: He is signing the law at 12:15 local time this afternoon in Montana and he's going to make a statement from an e‑mail I received from one of our Fox producers that if the Feds don't like this, Montana will consider secession. Now, that's another entirely different issue which we can talk about the lawfulness and constitutionality of. But Montana is really taking the lead on nullification.
GLENN: This guy is a huge Democrat.
JUDGE NAPOLITANO: He's a libertarian Democrat if you can believe that such an animal exists.
It isn't just how liberals feel. I bet if you did a poll amongst independents they'd agree the GOP has no ideas.
Whats the GOP plan on making sure every american has healthcare?
Whats the GOP plan on fighting global warming?
Whats the GOP plan on fixing our relations with world leaders who don't like us thanks to Bush?
Even McCain's own campaign manager says the GOP stands for nothing but "no" right now.
I agree about the progressives and two party system. Things wouldn't be that different under McCain than they are under Obama. McCain is proof that a progressive republican is not the way to go. Republicans forgot (and many still don't understand) that a conservative has to actually be conservative. I prefer fiscal conservative myself.
"It simply abolishes the 16th amendment and states affirmatively that congress shall have no power to tax the personal incomes of individual persons".
Congress would shit if that happened. :lol
What conservative need is someone who has an honest track record with being extremely fiscal conservative and someone who actually know what limited government means.
Let me add here a personal editorial comment. A large part of the secret of President Obama's political success is his self-presentation as calm, judicious, and fair-minded - and his ability to depict his opponents as intemperate and extreme. You'd think by now that Obama's opponents would have figured out this trick. You want to beat him? Great. Be more calm, more judicious, and more fair-minded. Don't be provoked. Don't throw wild allegations. Don't boycott. Don't lose your temper.
Instead, we get Anger Theater. It's not smart. And it's not working.
This pretty much sums up you guys problems:
http://newmajority.com/ShowScroll.aspx?ID=31294c4a-eee6-40b4-8571-21649eab8015QuoteLet me add here a personal editorial comment. A large part of the secret of President Obama's political success is his self-presentation as calm, judicious, and fair-minded - and his ability to depict his opponents as intemperate and extreme. You'd think by now that Obama's opponents would have figured out this trick. You want to beat him? Great. Be more calm, more judicious, and more fair-minded. Don't be provoked. Don't throw wild allegations. Don't boycott. Don't lose your temper.
Instead, we get Anger Theater. It's not smart. And it's not working.
Personally, I find David Frum to be just another tool in the shed, but you guys should probably start listening to him if you want to be relevant in the coming decades.
Also- sd, nothing bad could come from a balanced budget amendment! Why, look at how our responsible states are faring these days!
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
I think Dennis Miller said it best. The republicans need to back off, let the dems pass all this big spending progressive shit, but keep their fingers off of it. Then if it fails and some of it will fail (nothing is fail proof), they have something to use and work with. Of course this is like flipping a coin. If the good outweighs the bad then the dems win.
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
Yet his ratings are so high and he has so many viewers of his show? Seems like someone wants to hear/see what he has to say.
He never had any in the first place. He was irrelevant after he left SNL long before his 9/11 fueled conversion.I think Dennis Miller said it best. The republicans need to back off, let the dems pass all this big spending progressive shit, but keep their fingers off of it. Then if it fails and some of it will fail (nothing is fail proof), they have something to use and work with. Of course this is like flipping a coin. If the good outweighs the bad then the dems win.
Poor Dennis Miller. When Hollywood found out his conservative leanings, he lost alot of gigs/roles.
TheBlackStallion is hysterical
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
Yet his ratings are so high and he has so many viewers of his show? Seems like someone wants to hear/see what he has to say.
Yea, the same right-wing echo chamber that still supported Bush to the very end.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.
If that were enacted, it would starve the federal government back into the original footprint that the founders intended for it
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.
Wazzat?
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.
Wazzat?
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.
Wazzat?
I know you know this Mandark. :)
49 states to 1 state? 1984.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984
Just saying, at one time democrats were really out of favor, yet managed to rebuild and make themselves relevant again.
Edit: Just seen Fear's response as well.
Nah, thats states carried that I used. The electoral votes total would obviously be different.
Dunno if I'd call that a comeback. Shitty contender vs popular, historic sitting president more like
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
Yet his ratings are so high and he has so many viewers of his show? Seems like someone wants to hear/see what he has to say.
Yea, the same right-wing echo chamber that still supported Bush to the very end.
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
Yet his ratings are so high and he has so many viewers of his show? Seems like someone wants to hear/see what he has to say.
Yea, the same right-wing echo chamber that still supported Bush to the very end.
If you think Glenn Beck is a Bush guy, you're either ill informed or not very bright. I clearly remember Beck bashing Bush on his radio show on a number of issues ranging from spending to immigration, months before the election. I highly doubt the 30% that supported Bush all tune in to hear Beck bash their guy. I think it's far more accurate to say Hannity was and still is a Bush guy.
I am nothing if not a sore winner.
But yes, standing astride history during the worst economic crisis in decades and yelling "porkulus" shows a true desire to be relevant.
Another great anecdote- Obama had the Republican leadership over the other day talking about Health Care. He said he knew that they'd been wanting to cap malpractice awards and he was prepared to do so as a step in their direction. Then he asked where they'd be willing to take a step in his direction. They couldn't find a single, solitary, even small concession they were willing to make.
And that's why you're irrelevant. You don't even want to get in the game, you just want to scream no over and over again. Have fun.
Not so fast my friend! Don't think that because conservatives aren't the majority now that they can't come back to power. After all, it seems you guys have managed to comeback pretty well since that 49-1 election.If you guys are serious about developing a new conservative movement that can capture the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans, you should probably stop quoting Glen Beck.
Yet his ratings are so high and he has so many viewers of his show? Seems like someone wants to hear/see what he has to say.
Yea, the same right-wing echo chamber that still supported Bush to the very end.
If you think Glenn Beck is a Bush guy, you're either ill informed or not very bright. I clearly remember Beck bashing Bush on his radio show on a number of issues ranging from spending to immigration, months before the election. I highly doubt the 30% that supported Bush all tune in to hear Beck bash their guy. I think it's far more accurate to say Hannity was and still is a Bush guy.
If you think I said Glenn Beck is a Bush guy, then you're an idiot who can't read. We are discussing his audience, not the man himself.
I have watched Beck, he throws out Bush bashing so he can appear to be A FREE THINKER WOOOO. If you think Beck is being watched by anyone but that the 20% of the country that still self-identifies as Republican or the 24% who still think Bush did a good job, then I don't know what to tell you.
Seriously, guys. Gimme a platform that 1) is recognizably conservative, 2) has a natural constituency, and 3) could carry the GOP back into power.
Yeah, you've got nothing.
On the first point, fraud and corruption are a tiny fraction of spending. If you want to make significant cuts you have to target big, popular programs like Social Security and Medicare. Good luck selling that to an aging population.
On the second point, who's your base? You get rid of the people who are outraged by homos, immigrants, feminists, and Muslims, and what does that leave you? You'd be conceding half your current seats to a new third party, at the least.
Edit: Besides, its not like we'll see Social Security when we are old. It'll likely be gone by then.
So, we all know what we need to do. Everyone go fuck like rabbits and make a ton of babies that will be working age when we retire to support us. ;)
So, we all know what we need to do. Everyone go fuck like rabbits and make a ton of babies that will be working age when we retire to support us. ;)
Or create an EB army with which to conquer the world. :-*
You wanna show the math on how SS is unsustainable, or at least explain what an alternate pensions policy would look like?
You wanna show the math on how SS is unsustainable, or at least explain what an alternate pensions policy would look like?
Social Security's financing problems are long term and will not affect today's retirees and near-retirees for many years, but they are very large and serious. People are living longer, the first baby boomers are nearing retirement, and the birth rate is lower than in the past. The result is that the worker-to-beneficiary ratio has fallen from 16.5-to-1 in 1950 to 3.3-to-1 today. Within 40 years it will be 2-to-1. At this ratio there will not be enough workers to pay scheduled benefits at current tax rates.
Social Security is not sustainable at currently scheduled levels over the long term with current tax rates without large infusions of additional revenue. There will be a growing shortfall once the trust fund reserves are exhausted in 2041.
QuoteSocial Security is not sustainable at currently scheduled levels over the long term with current tax rates without large infusions of additional revenue. There will be a growing shortfall once the trust fund reserves are exhausted in 2041.Just saying, if they don't make changes, you or I might not see much or anything from SS. SS was never meant to be the only thing people used to retire on anyway.
I was going to bump this to see why the conservative trio was spamming topics lately, but now I know why this was abandoned.
We took notes from you guys' defense spending.I'll try and take notes from you grammer.
Wow, just as I thought. Liberals try to troll/shit up the thread again. And who is it at the helm? Admiral Viscen and Card Cheat. The usual suspects so to speak.
*Reads Shogun's post*
:lol :lol
Card Cheat - Fine apprentice of Saul D. Alinsky.
Wow, just as I thought. Liberals try to troll/shit up the thread again. And who is it at the helm? Admiral Viscen and Card Cheat. The usual suspects so to speak.
*Reads Shogun's post*
:lol :lol
I know that on lgf, redstate and freeperland you guys aren't used to having someone question your bs much less laugh at it, but that ain't how this place works.
Wow, just as I thought. Liberals try to troll/shit up the thread again. And who is it at the helm? Admiral Viscen and Card Cheat. The usual suspects so to speak.
*Reads Shogun's post*
:lol :lol
Card Cheat - Fine apprentice of Saul D. Alinsky.
So is our President. And yes, he's your President, too. Don't like it? Move to someplace more in line with your ideology. May I suggest Somalia?
[youtube=560,345]7QDv4sYwjO0[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0
Wow, just as I thought. Liberals try to troll/shit up the thread again. And who is it at the helm? Admiral Viscen and Card Cheat. The usual suspects so to speak.
*Reads Shogun's post*
:lol :lol
What the fuck are you talking about? First off, I'm not a liberal. Second off, all I did was bump this thread and note that you still hadn't responded to Mandark. And I posted all of ONE time. This is why no one bothers responding to you dude.
Wow, just as I thought. Liberals try to troll/shit up the thread again. And who is it at the helm? Admiral Viscen and Card Cheat. The usual suspects so to speak.
*Reads Shogun's post*
:lol :lol
What the fuck are you talking about? First off, I'm not a liberal. Second off, all I did was bump this thread and note that you still hadn't responded to Mandark. And I posted all of ONE time. This is why no one bothers responding to you dude.
Dude, you've posted way more than 1 time in this thread. And all you've done since I joined here was troll threads I've made or try and shit them up. So go fuck yourself some more.
As for your political stance, you might as well change it to Democrat man. Nothing you've ever posted has even seemed remotely conservative IMO.
Also I don't believe I've posted in any of the 5 anti-Obama topics currently squatting on the first page of this forum. But presumably they're being "shit up" anyway so they might as well be condensed, no?
Or maybe you guys could get some real responses if you made some real posts instead of just lashing out at bogeymen at all times. I'll make another post when you respond to Mandark.
But I have the ultimate response for you. Mandark said that Medicare is the real problem. Ok fine. What is Medicare? A form of mini Universal Healthcare for elderly people mainly, although it isnt true UHC. Now, remove that, and put UHC in its place. Yep, there goes anything for future generations concerning social security.
*obligatory "where were you and the deficit hawks/nut jobs during the last 8 years" post *
*obligatory "where were you and the deficit hawks/nut jobs during the last 8 years" post *
Where was I? Not posting on internet forums. I had others things to do then.
QuoteBut I have the ultimate response for you. Mandark said that Medicare is the real problem. Ok fine. What is Medicare? A form of mini Universal Healthcare for elderly people mainly, although it isnt true UHC. Now, remove that, and put UHC in its place. Yep, there goes anything for future generations concerning social security.
is there a solution or do we let the elderly care for themselves?
*obligatory "where were you and the deficit hawks/nut jobs during the last 8 years" post *
Where was I? Not posting on internet forums. I had others things to do then.
Like what, meet men in public restrooms?
QuoteBut I have the ultimate response for you. Mandark said that Medicare is the real problem. Ok fine. What is Medicare? A form of mini Universal Healthcare for elderly people mainly, although it isnt true UHC. Now, remove that, and put UHC in its place. Yep, there goes anything for future generations concerning social security.
is there a solution or do we let the elderly care for themselves?
There isnt an easy solution. The only ways I know of to fix this are bigger deficits, higher taxes or spending cuts.
I honestly see a combination of all three being used.
i saw we just sort of subtly take away things that old people like so that have no reason to keep on living.
get rid of all Country Buffets, Matlock and Memorial Day Parades.
we'll still have Memorial Day Parades, but we won't tell the old people
how exactly? Our right to freedom of speech wasn't under threat by any outside sources in the last 8 years.*obligatory "where were you and the deficit hawks/nut jobs during the last 8 years" post *
Where was I? Not posting on internet forums. I had others things to do then.
Like what, meet men in public restrooms?
no, like defending your right to freedom of speech. ;)
how exactly? Our right to freedom of speech wasn't under threat by any outside sources in the last 8 years.*obligatory "where were you and the deficit hawks/nut jobs during the last 8 years" post *
Where was I? Not posting on internet forums. I had others things to do then.
Like what, meet men in public restrooms?
no, like defending your right to freedom of speech. ;)
brown people hate us for our freedoms
Glenn Beck, Simulcasting Discontent
By Mike Hale
Before starting his performance Thursday night at the Midland Theater in Kansas City, Mo., which was simulcast to more than 440 movie houses around the country, Glenn Beck walked over to the camera, waved, and acknowledged the critic for The New York Times. The poor guy was in a theater somewhere in New York, Mr. Beck said, “all by himself.”
Actually, at that moment I was one of eight people watching at the Clearview Chelsea Cinema, a number that would grow to 14 and hold there until almost the end of the show. (More on that later.) Not for the last time that night, Mr. Beck — the comedian, Fox News host and suddenly hot spokesman for American populist discontent — was hazy on the specifics but shrewdly aware of where his listeners were.
as we all know, freedom of speech was invented by america
hey i heard that 10 years ago sotomayor said that when it comes to latina issues, a latina might have better judgment
my god, what a racist. the poor downtrodden white male, oppressed in america.
well the main point of the military SHOULD be to protect us from the threat of other militaries actually attacking us. which, one would hope, ordinarily operates by deterring them from ever trying to do so at all. so in that sense I can see how serving in the military could protect freedom and all that jazz, too bad the people in charge used it for dumb shit.
Why do you guys (Gayhun and Shoguh) lock your own threads?
Why do you guys (Gayhun and Shoguh) lock your own threads?
hey i heard that 10 years ago sotomayor said that when it comes to latina issues, a latina might have better judgment
my god, what a racist. the poor downtrodden white male, oppressed in america.
::)
It isn't a judge's job to view the law through the lens of color. There is no latina law or white law, there is simply the law. If one doesn't like a particular law then we have ways to change such laws.
I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.
And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.
But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.
And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."
When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.
And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.
-Samuel Alito
well the main point of the military SHOULD be to protect us from the threat of other militaries actually attacking us. which, one would hope, ordinarily operates by deterring them from ever trying to do so at all. so in that sense I can see how serving in the military could protect freedom and all that jazz, too bad the people in charge used it for dumb shit..
huh it seems that was no problem with alito
we only have 1 thread for lol news. it made no sense to have decent discussion threads.Fixed.
political discussion thread = lolwe only have 1 thread for lol news. it made no sense to have decent discussion threads.Fixed.
political discussion thread = lolwe only have 1 thread for lol news. it made no sense to have decent discussion threads.Fixed.
LOOK AT GLENN BECK OWNING THE VIEW OH YEAH = decent dicussion
got it.
What exactly was the point of the Glen Beck thread? I didn't get the summary in the OP.
You know, when Jehovah Witnesses show up at my house, I usually deck out the Megadeath or Slayer stuff before I open the door. Makes them change their minds usually.offending the base :'(
You know, when Jehovah Witnesses show up at my house, I usually deck out the Megadeath or Slayer stuff before I open the door. Makes them change their minds usually.offending the base :'(
brown people hate us for our freedoms
no, hardline extremists hate us for what America/The West bring to the table for their people which undermines their control. At least, thats my view.
brown people hate us for our freedoms
no, hardline extremists hate us for what America/The West bring to the table for their people which undermines their control. At least, that's my view.
It couldn't possibly be because of our decades of undermining their own control of their countries (the Shah, etc), our having military bases on their land, or our support of Israel. All of which are the reasons THEY FUCKING SAID THEY ATTACKED US. No. It's "our freedoms".
So, why aren't the Netherlands fucking DUST if that's true? And Canada and Sweden and Finland and the rest of the countries that are actually freer than we are? Oh, gee, I wonder.
Why not do that and offer tax cuts to companies that keep them here?good point. I am guessing because in the end it would effectively work like an import tariff, where foreign companies are competitively disadvantaged
But as Mandark pointed out, in most cases these hardliners are the current fringe groups that want more power/control and to turn their respective countries' governments from secular to religious.
Why not do that and offer tax cuts to companies that keep them here?good point. I am guessing because in the end it would effectively work like an import tariff, where foreign companies are competitively disadvantaged
But as Mandark pointed out, in most cases these hardliners are the current fringe groups that want more power/control and to turn their respective countries' governments from secular to religious.
Yeah, but enough about the Republican party.
Just read the Ballmer (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAKluP7yIwJY) thing from the other thread.I don't think the accounting works exactly like that. If I remember correctly, Microsoft can amortize a large portion of expenses over the expected useful life of software licenses (but this amortized amount does not include R&D, which has to be immediately expensed and is a primary cost driver). You are correct about shifting jobs, but I am not sure of the impact that would tangibly have on the costs. Either way you cut it though, he is talking out of his ass
I think I understand his argument. In the current situation, Microsoft pays much higher rates on its US profits than its Ireland profits. So when doing the books, it will shift as many costs as possible under the US umbrella, leaving more of the profit untouched in Ireland. One way to do this is to hire people in the US. If you tax their Irish profits at the US rate, then they no longer have this incentive.
Why not do that and offer tax cuts to companies that keep them here?good point. I am guessing because in the end it would effectively work like an import tariff, where foreign companies are competitively disadvantaged
I think we have trade agreements that keep us from doing this as well.
I can't say how fucking absurd it is to claim those weird right-wing bait topics are serious discussion while the big political thread isn't?political discussion thread = lolwe only have 1 thread for lol news. it made no sense to have decent discussion threads.Fixed.
LOOK AT GLENN BECK OWNING THE VIEW OH YEAH = decent dicussion
got it.
lol, did someone get upset? Cheebs if you don't like the thread, don't come in it. You don't see me in the Liberal thread, at least not in a long time.
You know, when Jehovah Witnesses show up at my house, I usually deck out the Megadeath or Slayer stuff before I open the door. Makes them change their minds usually.
Except America doesn't have a viable socialist party
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/comic-riffs/2009/06/the_interview_mallard_fillmore.html
thought this may be of interest
go tell the european socialists your article talks about and ask if american democrats are socialists.Except America doesn't have a viable socialist party
Sure we do. They're called democrats. :teehee
go see/visit/talk to the european socialists your article talks about and ask if american democrats are socialists.
go tell the european socialists your article talks about and ask if american democrats are socialists.Except America doesn't have a viable socialist party
Sure we do. They're called democrats. :teehee
go tell the european socialists your article talks about and ask if american democrats are socialists.Except America doesn't have a viable socialist party
Sure we do. They're called democrats. :teehee
"What? Why are you calling a bunch of right-wing conservatives like the Democrats, 'socialists'? Strange Americans."
3 Trillion - so conservative.
Owning GM - so right-wing
:drool
go tell the european socialists your article talks about and ask if american democrats are socialists.Except America doesn't have a viable socialist party
Sure we do. They're called democrats. :teehee
"What? Why are you calling a bunch of right-wing conservatives like the Democrats, 'socialists'? Strange Americans."
3 Trillion - so conservative.
Owning GM - so right-wing
:drool
Funny liberals love to use socialism > capitalism to defend their policiesso, how many democrats in the white house or senate have said that? Seeing how you used european socialists to describe the current elected officials of the democratic party.
in the american sense? of course democrats aren't conservative. but compared to EUROPEAN SOCIALISTS of which you directly compared to the american democratic party they are clearly much much more conservative.
Funny liberals love to use socialism > capitalism to defend their policiesso, how many democrats in the white house or senate have said that? Seeing how you used european socialists to describe the current elected officials of the democratic party.
show me a list.
and yet democrats 't pushing for single payer health care or the nationalizing of the banks and so forth. easy socialist policies taken by many socialists in europe.Funny liberals love to use socialism > capitalism to defend their policiesso, how many democrats in the white house or senate have said that? Seeing how you used european socialists to describe the current elected officials of the democratic party.
show me a list.
I think Shogun meant that the actions the Democrats take are socialistic. That's why he compared them to European Socialists.
so if anything leaning towards the socialist scale is used that means they should be called socialists?
we had social security and medicare under reagan. socialist polices. is reagan part of the RED MENACE?
and yet democrats 't pushing for single payer health care or the nationalizing of the banks and so forth. easy socialist policies taken by many socialists in europe.
Health care reform plan would cost more than a trillion dollars.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/08/feehery.health.trillion/index.html
What's spending another trillion at this point eh? Let me guess...
The Feehery Group (http://www.thefeeherygroup.com/) already has an impressive list of Fortune 500 companies and trade associations, including Newscorp, Ford Motor Company, PHARMA (http://www.phrma.org/), and the United States Chamber of Commerce, among its clients.
Hey I'm just posting a story from one of your most trusted LIBERAL networks.
Funny liberals love to use socialism > capitalism to defend their policies, but want to dump the word "socialism" when applied to them. We can call it socialism "mini me" if you prefer.I think your problem is that you think all politicians are complete socialists or capitalists and that anybody who's a little moderate would be forsaking their values or something.
First, let me repeat, there is no bill currently. You can't very well ask for a cost estimate of something that doesn't exist.
The costs of UHC have basically nothing to do with the current process. The only reason I can think you'd bring it up is you haven't been paying terribly close attention.
Bill or no bill, that doesn't mean people can't predict what it will cost just because you don't like the numbers. We predict hurricanes every year before hurricane season. Sometimes those predictions are right, sometimes their wrong, sometimes their close, and sometimes they are very far off. Still the predictions are made. You assume Obama will get what he wants, but I think his Gitmo problems proves we don't always get what we want.
Rasmussen reports voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on economic issues.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues/trust_on_issues
Obamanomics DOA?
kinda sad that on the anniversary of d-day the british elected a bunch of fascists
Interesting poll numbers of likely voters. I'll wait for a few more polls to see whether this is an outlier or the real deal. I seriously doubt most Americans prefer the republican view on Iraq
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/26393/
I know, I know, its Glenn Beck and you Liberals here absolutely loathe him, but this article is a good read. Its an interview with a British Politician who gives his assessment on a few things.
I'd suggest reading it and taking it to heart. After all, we don't want to end up with teeth like the British.
hey Ganhyun, now that I've got you here, could you explain why right-wing types are disproportionately attracted to capitalizing random words?
Interesting poll numbers of likely voters. I'll wait for a few more polls to see whether this is an outlier or the real deal. I seriously doubt most Americans prefer the republican view on Iraq
If the government is going to offer HC then we know they're going to need doctors, dentists, surgeons, nurses, just to name a few things. (I can't imagine a doctor wanting to quit the private sector and take a pay cut to work for the government.)
Can't wait to hear 538's take on the poll. I'd imagine that eventually people will lose patience in Obama's economic practices and start paying attention to the Outrage Express, but I don't think it's happening right now.538 tends to discard Rasmussen, he says they have a republican lean in all their results.
hey Ganhyun, now that I've got you here, could you explain why right-wing types are disproportionately attracted to capitalizing random words?
Ditto.
President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration's emerging health care overhaul. The "pay-as-you-go" budget formula plan is significantly weaker than a proposal Obama issued with little fanfare last month.
It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.
Speaking of hating Jews, an 88-year-old white supremacist shot 2 people at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in DC.
And guess what! He was a Free Republic member who asked about the birth certificate. Freep quickly removed his thread and is now calling him a Democrat.
Cache: http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:niXSYG-nVO8J:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2141655/posts+%E2%80%9CObama+is+missing%E2%80%9D+free+republic&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
In 1981, this 88 year old also walked into the Federal Reserve with a shotgun and tried to do a "citizen's arrest" (kidnap) the Federal Reserve Board to protest the high interest rates.
Even considering that he got 11 years in prison and is nearly 90, the FBI or police probably should have done regular check-ups on him in person. At least make sure that he can't get another gun.
spoiler (click to show/hide)Why did you caps STFU? Why do you spell ok "kay?"[close]
And guess what! He was a Free Republic member who asked about the birth certificate. Freep quickly removed his thread and is now calling him a Democrat.
Cache: http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:niXSYG-nVO8J:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2141655/posts+%E2%80%9CObama+is+missing%E2%80%9D+free+republic&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/10/740957/-Foxs-Beck-blames-holocaust-shooting-on-left-wing-Socialists