Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 40021 - 40040 of total 52606 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
mtnyoung

Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
Dec 13, 2012 - 05:04pm PT
Q: Are Republicans right about anything?

Which ones?

Some are right about a lot of things. But we saw how far John Huntsman was able to get in the Republican primaries....

No intelligent/reasonable Repub could possible get past the party "base" in a primary. They'll have to deal with this or continue to be losers.
dirtbag

climber
Dec 13, 2012 - 05:08pm PT
Huntsman has no clout and is completely ostracized.
mtnyoung

Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
Dec 13, 2012 - 05:36pm PT
Huntsman has no clout and is completely ostracized.

Yep, that's what I said (it just took me more words to get there).
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 13, 2012 - 07:17pm PT
America's greatest threat is the Republican Party
The only thing that stands in the way of the Republicans from making America into a Fascist Theocracy is our Government

That is why they are at war with America, so they can extract the riches out, and make the American middle class into a class slave labor to the Corporations
The Warbler

climber
the edge of America
Dec 13, 2012 - 07:18pm PT
Reality, facts and common sense have been ostracized from the republigoon party along with him
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 13, 2012 - 07:25pm PT
Fry , Warbler , dirtbag , philo...I raise my celebration ale to you fine men...RJ
dirtbag

climber
Dec 13, 2012 - 07:32pm PT
Thank you RJ: and likewise, I toast and salute you.
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 13, 2012 - 07:36pm PT
Now after everything we have gained, the Republicans want to take it away.

They want;
More poverty, less jobs
higher eligibility age for Medicare and SS
to pay less taxes
to gut environmental regulations,
gut the social safety net
gut labor protections
more military spending
more wars, more intervention in the ME
more prisoners, more suicides, more racial conflict...

They want a race to bottom, all for short term gain, power and cash

WWJS??

They think they are right, but they are just despicable hypocrites
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 13, 2012 - 07:37pm PT
I toast you all as well
and Norton, and apogee

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 13, 2012 - 07:40pm PT
And Jingus....!
The Warbler

climber
the edge of America
Dec 13, 2012 - 08:03pm PT
It's an honor, a privilege, and damn good fun to slander the GOP with y'all, rj.


I feel like Jon Stewart - the material never quits coming from the con squad.
The Warbler

climber
the edge of America
Dec 13, 2012 - 08:28pm PT
The G.O.P.’s Existential Crisis
By PAUL KRUGMAN

It’s important to make this point, because I keep seeing articles about the “fiscal cliff” that do, in fact, describe it — often in the headline — as a debt crisis. But it isn’t. The U.S. government is having no trouble borrowing to cover its deficit. In fact, its borrowing costs are near historic lows. And even the confrontation over the debt ceiling that looms a few months from now if we do somehow manage to avoid going over the fiscal cliff isn’t really about debt.

No, what we’re having is a political crisis, born of the fact that one of our two great political parties has reached the end of a 30-year road. The modern Republican Party’s grand, radical agenda lies in ruins — but the party doesn’t know how to deal with that failure, and it retains enough power to do immense damage as it strikes out in frustration.

Before I talk about that reality, a word about the current state of budget “negotiations.”

Why the scare quotes? Because these aren’t normal negotiations in which each side presents specific proposals, and horse-trading proceeds until the two sides converge. By all accounts, Republicans have, so far, offered almost no specifics. They claim that they’re willing to raise $800 billion in revenue by closing loopholes, but they refuse to specify which loopholes they would close; they are demanding large cuts in spending, but the specific cuts they have been willing to lay out wouldn’t come close to delivering the savings they demand.

It’s a very peculiar situation. In effect, Republicans are saying to President Obama, “Come up with something that will make us happy.” He is, understandably, not willing to play that game. And so the talks are stuck.

Why won’t the Republicans get specific? Because they don’t know how. The truth is that, when it comes to spending, they’ve been faking it all along — not just in this election, but for decades. Which brings me to the nature of the current G.O.P. crisis.

Since the 1970s, the Republican Party has fallen increasingly under the influence of radical ideologues, whose goal is nothing less than the elimination of the welfare state — that is, the whole legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society. From the beginning, however, these ideologues have had a big problem: The programs they want to kill are very popular. Americans may nod their heads when you attack big government in the abstract, but they strongly support Social Security, Medicare, and even Medicaid. So what’s a radical to do?

The answer, for a long time, has involved two strategies. One is “starve the beast,” the idea of using tax cuts to reduce government revenue, then using the resulting lack of funds to force cuts in popular social programs. Whenever you see some Republican politician piously denouncing federal red ink, always remember that, for decades, the G.O.P. has seen budget deficits as a feature, not a bug.

Arguably more important in conservative thinking, however, was the notion that the G.O.P. could exploit other sources of strength — white resentment, working-class dislike of social change, tough talk on national security — to build overwhelming political dominance, at which point the dismantling of the welfare state could proceed freely. Just eight years ago, Grover Norquist, the antitax activist, looked forward cheerfully to the days when Democrats would be politically neutered: “Any farmer will tell you that certain animals run around and are unpleasant, but when they’ve been fixed, then they are happy and sedate.”

O.K., you see the problem: Democrats didn’t go along with the program, and refused to give up. Worse, from the Republican point of view, all of their party’s sources of strength have turned into weaknesses. Democratic dominance among Hispanics has overshadowed Republican dominance among southern whites; women’s rights have trumped the politics of abortion and antigay sentiment; and guess who finally did get Osama bin Laden.

And look at where we are now in terms of the welfare state: far from killing it, Republicans now have to watch as Mr. Obama implements the biggest expansion of social insurance since the creation of Medicare.

So Republicans have suffered more than an election defeat, they’ve seen the collapse of a decades-long project. And with their grandiose goals now out of reach, they literally have no idea what they want — hence their inability to make specific demands.

It’s a dangerous situation. The G.O.P. is lost and rudderless, bitter and angry, but it still controls the House and, therefore, retains the ability to do a lot of harm, as it lashes out in the death throes of the conservative dream.

Our best hope is that business interests will use their influence to limit the damage. But the odds are that the next few years will be very, very ugly.
Nohea

Trad climber
Living Outside the Statist Quo
Dec 13, 2012 - 08:40pm PT
Krug's is always a funny read....thanks!

Hey I was wondering why you folks are so against the right to work passage? Why do you demand that I a public school teacher be a member of the union? That's the law here and I fully support the repeal of the law that says I must be a member and I do support my right to work. Nurse f's cartoon gives a false impression. Teaching has the lowest pay and worse benefits that I've had since I was 24, This has been my only union gig.

I'm not whining about pay like my peers are, I will never strike and if that will make me a scab well then I'll be the scab that is covering up the wound that is the union member.

Aloha,
Will

Edit: yea all I ask is let me opt out, the union grants no benefits, only takes away and slows the advancement of evaluating teachers here. My admins have been told my room is always open for them, never worry about telling me ahead of time, as the union requires.
Ghost

climber
A long way from where I started
Dec 13, 2012 - 09:05pm PT
Hey I was wondering why you folks are so against the right to work passage? Why do you demand that I a public school teacher be a member of the union?

Are you sure that people who are "against the right to work" demand that you be a member of a union?

Maybe it's the other way round. Maybe "right to work" is code for "destroy unions."

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why not let those who would unionize do so, and let those who prefer not to join a union be independent?

Edit: Oh, f*#k! I've posted in this stupid political thread.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Dec 13, 2012 - 10:07pm PT
regarding why a person who works in a union shop should have to join the union...or at least pay the dues:

Generally speaking (and there are exceptions), you come to the job because of the pay, benefits, and protections that it offers. However, those exist to a large extent, due to union bargaining and efforts over time, that have created those things, and they were paid for by the union dues.

So, one wants to get the benefits, without paying the freight.

If a non-Union worker wants to come in, but get paid 75% of what the Union worker got paid, I'd consider that fair.

When the Union goes out on strike to get better benefits, and you don't, and they get those benefits...do you get them, too? Should you?

But IT IS NOT ABOUT ANY OF THAT.

It is about Repubs trying to eliminate a source of funding for democratic politicians, plain and simple. That is the ONLY reason this is happening.

Nohea

Trad climber
Living Outside the Statist Quo
Dec 13, 2012 - 10:23pm PT
It is about Repubs trying to eliminate a source of funding for democratic politicians, plain and simple. That is the ONLY reason this is happening.

You nailed the party reason why right to work is fought....

But myself and many want the option to fully opt out of public unions. The other part of your question....uh did you read what I wrote?
I have much better negotiations skills as shown by my résumé of salaries than my union. I would right now accept the governors offer, the union rejects it.

So rephrase what you said and yes I will gladly go without the union who has "fought" for the pathetic set of salaries and bene's that I have.....hell I'm committed to the next generation....ours is a 16 trillion f*#k up
jghedge

climber
Dec 13, 2012 - 11:06pm PT
Definitely some money quotes in Krugman's op-ed today

One wonders what would happen if the MSM started adopting the same reality-based factuality towards speaking about the repub party that Krugman uses:

"...one of our two great political parties has reached the end of a 30-year road. The modern Republican Party’s grand, radical agenda lies in ruins — but the party doesn’t know how to deal with that failure, and it retains enough power to do immense damage as it strikes out in frustration."

" far from killing it, Republicans now have to watch as Mr. Obama implements the biggest expansion of social insurance since the creation of Medicare."

"Republicans have suffered more than an election defeat, they’ve seen the collapse of a decades-long project."

Actually you do hear conservatives starting to say pretty much the same thing - except they delusionally believe that the answer is to double-down on the same failed policies that got them where they are today, like the article below, from RedState's Erick Erickson (no, not our EE haha)

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/13/the-republicans-have-failed-the-nation/

I don't think people on the left truly realize how bad the election was for the wingnuts, and how completely devastated they are - by far the worst election result the Right has had since 1860. Read their blogs, and laugh at their desperate attempts to make sense out of the utter collapse of their pathetic fantasy world - you literally wonder how they can even function in adult society anymore. Even their (supposedly) most astute columnists like Krauthammer and Horowitz are dabbling in alternate realities so far-fetched that their own dedicated fan-base is shooting them down in the reader's comments sections of their own articles - as if none of them can believe what is happening anymore, and what little grasp of reality they had before the election is now shattered.
John M

climber
Dec 13, 2012 - 11:29pm PT
Nohea, do you acknowledge that there were good reasons for unions coming into being? If you do, then what forces do you think have made them unnecessary today?


Eisenhower warned about the military industrial complex. I think the same warning is true in a sense for unions.

Just because there are dangers of having a military doesn't mean you get rid of it. There are still benefits to be gained from having one. I believe the same is true of unions. There are still good reasons to have them, but they can be dangerous and stifle many good things.

I wonder how long it would take for wages to go down and hours to go up if there were no unions. Especially as corporations gain more and more power.
Nohea

Trad climber
Living Outside the Statist Quo
Dec 13, 2012 - 11:43pm PT
Nohea, do you acknowledge that there were good reasons for unions coming into being? If you do, then what forces do you think have made them unnecessary today?

No but I'll play,,, 1890 USA maybe

2nd Q Living standards, brought about by Capitalsm





John M

climber
Dec 13, 2012 - 11:51pm PT
1890 USA maybe

just maybe? whoa.. Well, you win, you got a poor education, so I guess in your case the unions failed. So did our education system.


I would right now accept the governors offer, the union rejects it.

So rephrase what you said and yes I will gladly go without the union who has "fought" for the pathetic set of salaries and bene's that I have.....hell I'm committed to the next generation....ours is a 16 trillion f*#k up

This doesn't make a lot of sense. You say the union got a pathetic set of salaries and bene's, yet you are willing to accept the current offer from the government. So either you are willing to work for pathetic wages, or the union was able to negotiate a wage you would accept. which is it?
Messages 40021 - 40040 of total 52606 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews