Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 41661 - 41680 of total 45428 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
John M

climber
Apr 1, 2014 - 10:53pm PT
Norton, I would not vote for the current crop of Republicans. But the Republican faithful learned nothing from that experience because it wasn't long enough.

. All that I was just saying that it would be interesting to give the country to them for 20 or 30 years and see what happened. Just say.. okay.. you can have it for 20 years. And lets see if your policies lead to a better country. I know that their beliefs won't lead to a better country, but most Republicans don't seem to understand that. And no.. I would not do that, but it would be interesting.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Apr 1, 2014 - 11:25pm PT
John M wrote: All that I was just saying that it would be interesting to give the country to them for 20 or 30 years and see what happened.


It is here, cut funding to education, the arts, healthcare, get rid of SS and Medicare and give (tax breaks/loopholes) the one percent most of the wealth in the country.

They torture, they lie, cheat, want to control women bodies and what they do with them, they are against gay rights, civil rights and anything that would benefit the common man. They are against healthcare, education, equal pay, forward thinking, climate change, they think the earth is 7,000 years old and that humans rode on the backs of dinosaurs.

How much worst can it get??

John M

climber
Apr 1, 2014 - 11:26pm PT
It would seem that it has to get a lot worse because almost half the country still believes in them.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 1, 2014 - 11:26pm PT
There's 2 good reasons. Reason 1 is that it is a statement to their base that they have a plan and that it conforms with all the rhetoric they've been showering on them. Reason 2 is that it gives them a starting point for negotiations if negotiations ever took place. Unlike Democrats, Republicans care about making a show to their base and actually have control of a chamber of Congress in which to do it.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Apr 1, 2014 - 11:32pm PT
John wrote: It would seem that it has to get a lot worse because almost half the country still believes in them.

They don't believe, they just hate and are controlled by fear.

Knowledge is power, with knowledge comes understanding, you don't let fear control you when you have knowledge.

Their base lacks knowledge.
Jorroh

climber
Apr 2, 2014 - 12:26am PT
" All that I was just saying that it would be interesting to give the country to them for 20 or 30 years and see what happened."

For all intents and purposes we've already had that experiment. Market Fundamentalism has been a core guiding principle of public policy from the early eighties to the present day, despite all the negative economic, environmental and social consequences.

bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Apr 2, 2014 - 07:30am PT
http://thefederalist.com/2014/04/01/atheists-case-religious-liberty/


it appears winston smith may not be dead, but he's definitely on life support...and libs are lining up to pull the plug
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Apr 2, 2014 - 08:59am PT
Wow. There are a lot of dim-witted, zealous Obama fanbois in this thread.

You guys keep trying to validate the ACA because it looks better than GOP alternatives. While that may be true, it doesn't change the fact that it's crappy policy.

Norton's red herrings cracked me up. Trying to blame the 2008 crash on the Republicans? That's just sad. You're lie of "15 million Americans lost their jobs" was a nice touch.
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Apr 2, 2014 - 09:41am PT
There are a lot of dim-witted, zealous Obama fanbois in this thread.

Sketch is so cool because he's nobody's fanboi.


RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:06am PT
And I don't care about what Bush did or what Ryan proposes. What I do care about are the inherent problems of the ACA. But you guys keep trying to divert attention away from this crappy legislation. I'm sure it's preferable to honest discussion on the subject.

What do you expect, when a democrat agrees to compromise, and puts in a Repug proposal cooked up by Heritage? You don't like the ACA, talk to your masters at Heritage that created it.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:15am PT
John M wrote: All that I was just saying that it would be interesting to give the country to them for 20 or 30 years and see what happened.




How much worst can it get??

You have no idea, apparently.

We are talking about creating PERMANENT, IRREVERSIBLE, changes in governing infrastructure. The entire supreme court conservative. Changes to the Constitution that guarantees removal of voting rights from minorities, perhaps reserved to landowners. PERMANENT gerrymandering of districts, protected from judicial review. Permanent standing army to which all are drafted, unless you have "pull". Constitutionally mandated flat tax, with social programs abolished CONSTITUTIONALLY, and massive expansion of military. Science taught is determined by vote of non-scientists. Health care abolished for those below certain income level, so system not "gummed up" by lesser Americans. Constitutional definitions of "Real" and "lesser" Americans.

it can get MUCH MUCH worse.
Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:24am PT
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula

Apr 2, 2014 - 06:41am PT
There are a lot of dim-witted, zealous Obama fanbois in this thread.

Sketch is so cool because he's nobody's fanboi.


RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111

It's telling that so many responses are little more than "F*ck you! You suck! You're dumb!"
dirtbag

climber
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:29am PT
I've read quite a few posts written by John. He gets it.

I think one of the lasting impacts of the Reagan Revolution is that it has tilted the baseline for political discourse farther to the right, so instead of the kinds of sweeping health care reforms we might have gotten 50 years ago, we have a compromise bill put forth by a conservative think tank. Instead of a Roosevelt or LBJ, we had Clinton ("The era of big government is over") and Obama.
dirtbag

climber
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:32am PT



Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville

Apr 2, 2014 - 05:59am PT
Wow. There are a lot of dim-witted, zealous Obama fanbois in this thread.
.

Yes Sketch, because posts like this add so much to the conversation.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:40am PT
That is really the sad part about these republicans...they advocate for something and as soon Obama and democrats say OK, they are against it.



moosedrool

climber
lost, far away from Poland
Apr 2, 2014 - 10:57am PT
We don't deserve Obama.

If we gave him our full support, we would have by now a true affordable health care, fixed infrastructure, leading the world in green technologies, improved education, fixed tax code, and more.

We lost our chance. The rest of the world moved forward, we moved backward.

Really depressing.

Andrzej
Sanskara

climber
Apr 2, 2014 - 11:00am PT
Moose,

Yup!

We had our chance. Now I kinda feel like he poster yesterday ghost said give en control fir 20-30 years and let them see how good all there ideas really are.

It will get scary but bit might anyway at this rate?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Apr 2, 2014 - 11:01am PT
**Supreme Court Strikes Down Aggregate Limits on Federal Campaign Contributions
**

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/03/us/politics/supreme-court-ruling-on-campaign-contributions.html?hp&_r=0

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a major campaign finance decision, striking down limits on federal campaign contributions for the first time. The ruling, issued near the start of a campaign season, will change and most likely increase the role money plays in American politics.

The decision, by a 5-to-4 vote along ideological lines, was sort of a sequel to Citizens United, the 2010 decision that struck down limits on independent campaign spending by corporations and unions. But that ruling did nothing to disturb the other main form of campaign finance regulation: caps on direct contributions to candidates and political parties.

Wednesday’s decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, No. 12-536, addressed that second kind of regulation.

But it said that overall limits of $48,600 every two years for contributions to all federal candidates violated the First Amendment, as did separate aggregate limits on contributions to political party committees, currently $74,600.
**
Independent spending, the court said in Buckley, is political speech protected by the First Amendment.**



got that, John E? Money=speech.

so both the poor and the rich are now allowed to contribute more than $74,500.

All men were created equal.
WBraun

climber
Apr 2, 2014 - 11:27am PT
All men created equal

The Western type of civilization, industrialism and capitalism, is no material advancement.

It's nothing but a polished human animal material exploitation all at the cost of others.

You're worst than animals.

Stupidest system ever and it shows ......
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Apr 2, 2014 - 11:28am PT
In a proud display of patriotism, Sketch is gonna keep whining until our healthcare system is perfect.
Messages 41661 - 41680 of total 45428 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