Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 45041 - 45060 of total 52597 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 24, 2013 - 05:44am PT
crackaddict complained
I suppose since firefighters do their job well, we should outsource everything to Government bureaucracies. How much money was spent on the Mountain fire? $20 Million? I think we can all deal with that. But $4 Trillion? That is a different story.


You decry strawman arguments and then make one yourself in the same post? How fitting. The only people who argue for "outsourcing everything to government bureaucracies" exist in the imaginations of people who listen to too much right wing radio.
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Jul 24, 2013 - 05:53am PT
The wrongwingers are addicted to Koch.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Jul 24, 2013 - 07:02am PT
Normally I wouldn't indulge, philo, but the first point was so, pointed, I continued.

That is a damning list and I'd like to see one of these politard rightests try to defend that list, point by point.

DMT
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Jul 24, 2013 - 07:24am PT
Normally I wouldn't indulge, philo, but the first point was so, pointed, I continued.

Well that was pointed. What's your point? :-)
jghedge

climber
Jul 24, 2013 - 07:39am PT


"21: You believe America is a God fearing country, and that the Almighty protects those who believe just as you do. But it’s never crossed your mind that the majority of tornados, hurricanes and floods all occur in the Bible Belt."


Hahahahahaha
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Jul 24, 2013 - 07:43am PT
I don't really have one philo. I think we're all retarded for talking about this sh#t. ;-)

DMT
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 24, 2013 - 10:08am PT
http://www.scribd.com/doc/152696844/Fighting-Washington-for-All-Americans


As Congress goes on recess (from not doing anything so that they can spend more time fundraising) they have a plan to Fight Washington! Included are Sample Editorials so that your overworked interns don't need to invent terrible things for you to say about Americans as you Fight for Americans. Twitter hashtags because Congressmen don't have a clue about the interwebs! Lots and lots of ways to Maximize Your Exposure so that your constituents can see what a good job you are doing Fighting the Washington Establishment that you are now a part of! Just to be clear, this is ALL ABOUT Fighting Washington and has NOTHING to do with raising money.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 25, 2013 - 10:18pm PT
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-case-of-zombie-voters-in-south-carolina/2013/07/24/86de3c64-f403-11e2-aa2e-4088616498b4_blog.html?tid=pm_politics_pop


It turns out the claims of 953 votes by dead people actually involved not one election but 74 elections over a seven-year period.
So SLED’s investigation centered on 207 votes that allegedly were made by dead people in the Nov. 2, 2010 election — when a total of 1,365,480 votes were cast — after officials concluded that that batch constituted a “representative sampling” of the alleged voting irregularities. (Note that the number of alleged dead votes was less than 2/10,000th of all of the votes cast in that election.)

The report confirms what the State Election Commission had found after preliminarily examining some of the allegations: The so-called votes by dead people were the result of clerical errors or mistaken identities.
For instance, sometimes a son had the same name as a deceased father, and poll workers mixed up a dead father with a living son. (This happened 92 times in the initial probe, and then further investigation found seven more examples.)

In 56 cases, there was “bad data matching,” in which the DMV records had the Social Security of a dead person associated with a living voter. The living voter — with a different name and birth date — properly cast a ballot. Thirty-two votes attributed to dead people were simply the result of too-sensitive scanners.

In one case, someone cast an absentee ballot before dying; their vote still counts under the law. In two other cases, people requested an absentee ballot, but died before returning it, so no harm was done. In other cases, the wrong voter was marked as having cast a vote, and then the marks were not completely erased. There were several other types of clerical errors, too numerous to mention.

In other words, no zombie voters — just egg on the face of the politicians who promoted these “facts” across national television. So do they have any regrets?

tl;dr: People who want voter id laws passed in SC (and likely everywhere) to keep dead people from voting are lying or incredibly misinformed.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 26, 2013 - 05:09pm PT
Two powerful interviews.

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 05:33pm PT
You really have nothing new to harp on so you're posting Benghazi videos? Really?

I wish Sean Smith was still alive. He'd have some choice words.

jghedge

climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 05:36pm PT
It's a phony scandal. All but the most childish and desperate repubs have moved on.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 26, 2013 - 06:51pm PT
You can't descend to much lower depths of hypocrisy than this, now can you?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354556/obamacare-call-center-will-not-offer-healthcare-benefits-employees-eliana-johnson
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:00pm PT
If Obama had required call centers that his people hire to provide health insurance you'd call him a socialist dictator, forcing his will upon private enterprise.

But since he didn't he's a hypocrite.

#havinitbothways
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:04pm PT
Speaking of the National Review, TGT: Why are they colluding with Republicans to force a political agenda under the guise of objective journalism?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/07/groundswells-journalists-169212.html


David Corn has landed a scoop on a new group of Washington conservatives -- which includes several journalists -- that are engaged in a coordinated campaign against not just Democrats but the GOP leadership and the Republican establishment (including Karl Rove).

The heavy hitters in this group, dubbed "Groundswell," include Ginni Thomas (wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas), former UN ambassador John Bolton, and former GOP congressman Allen West, among several other operatives and congressional aides. But there are a fair amount of journalists in the group, too, and their involvement is likely to cast (or re-cast) doubt on the integrity of their reporting.

"Conservative journalists and commentators participating in Groundswell have included Breitbart News reporters Matthew Boyle and Mike Flynn, Washington Examiner executive editor Mark Tapscott, and National Review contributor Michael James Barton," Corn reports.

Boyle, who has spoken of his craft in militaristic terms, has a particularly close relationship to Groundswell. In one of several emails to Groundswell members, written in March, Boyle wrote: "I'm saying we can get pieces out fast on Breitbart. Whenever you have an idea, email or call me with a pitch and I'll do my best to get the story out there. Keep us on offense, them on defense. Even if the idea isn't perfect, I can help massage it to get there."

The wife of a Supreme Court Justice working to plant political news stories framed as journalism (for profit)? Don't see any problem there.

Also, who'd have thought Breitbart would be involved in political advocacy disguised as journalism? I'm shocked. SHOCKED!
jghedge

climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:04pm PT

"You can't descend to much lower depths of hypocrisy than this, now can you?"


Hahahaha, you tell me, hahahahahahaha

You being the resident expert
jghedge

climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:11pm PT


"Why are they colluding with Republicans to force a political agenda under the guise of objective journalism?"


Because they can't get hired as actual journalists, and being repub shills pays more than being unemployed.

Not terribly optimistic about their job prospects after their party collapses, however...
Dr. F.

Boulder climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 26, 2013 - 07:32pm PT
Republican Health Care Panic

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: July 25, 2013 NY Times

Leading Republicans appear to be nerving themselves up for another round of attempted fiscal blackmail. With the end of the fiscal year looming, they aren’t offering the kinds of compromises that might produce a deal and avoid a government shutdown; instead, they’re drafting extremist legislation — bills that would, for example, cut clean-water grants by 83 percent — that has no chance of becoming law. Furthermore, they’re threatening, once again, to block any rise in the debt ceiling, a move that would damage the U.S. economy and possibly provoke a world financial crisis.

Yet even as Republican politicians seem ready to go on the offensive, there’s a palpable sense of anxiety, even despair, among conservative pundits and analysts. Better-informed people on the right seem, finally, to be facing up to a horrible truth: Health care reform, President Obama’s signature policy achievement, is probably going to work.

And the good news about Obamacare is, I’d argue, what’s driving the Republican Party’s intensified extremism. Successful health reform wouldn’t just be a victory for a president conservatives loathe, it would be an object demonstration of the falseness of right-wing ideology. So Republicans are being driven into a last, desperate effort to head this thing off at the pass.

Some background: Although you’d never know it from all the fulminations, with prominent Republicans routinely comparing Obamacare to slavery, the Affordable Care Act is based on three simple ideas. First, all Americans should have access to affordable insurance, even if they have pre-existing medical problems. Second, people should be induced or required to buy insurance even if they’re currently healthy, so that the risk pool remains reasonably favorable. Third, to prevent the insurance “mandate” from being too onerous, there should be subsidies to hold premiums down as a share of income.

Is such a system workable? For a while, Republicans convinced themselves that it was doomed to failure, and that they could profit politically from the inevitable “train wreck.” But a system along exactly these lines has been operating in Massachusetts since 2006, where it was introduced by a Republican governor. What was his name? Mitt Somethingorother? And no trains have been wrecked so far.

The question is whether the Massachusetts success story can be replicated in other states, especially big states like California and New York with large numbers of uninsured residents. The answer to this question depends, in the first place, on whether insurance companies are willing to offer coverage at reasonable rates. And the answer, so far, is a clear “yes.” In California, insurers came in with bids running significantly below expectations; in New York, it appears that premiums will be cut roughly in half.

So is this a case of something for nothing, in which nobody loses? No. In states like California, which have allowed discrimination based on health status, a small number of young, healthy, affluent residents will see their premiums go up. In New York, people who don’t think they need insurance and are too rich to receive subsidies — probably an even smaller group — will feel put upon by being obliged to buy policies. Mainly, though, those insurance subsidies will cost money, and that money will, to an important extent, be raised through higher taxes on the 1 percent: tax increases that have, by the way, already taken effect.

Over all, then, health reform will help millions of Americans who were previously either too sick or too poor to get the coverage they needed, and also offer a great deal of reassurance to millions more who currently have insurance but fear losing it; it will provide these benefits at the expense of a much smaller number of other Americans, mostly the very well off. It is, if you like, a plan to comfort the afflicted while (slightly) afflicting the comfortable.

And the prospect that such a plan might succeed is anathema to a party whose whole philosophy is built around doing just the opposite, of taking from the “takers” and giving to the “job creators,” known to the rest of us as the “rich.” Hence the brinkmanship.

So will Republicans actually take us to the brink? If they do, it will be crucial to understand why they would do such a thing, when their own leaders have admitted that confrontations over the budget inflict substantial harm on the economy. It won’t be because they fear the budget deficit, which is coming down fast. Nor will it be because they sincerely believe that spending cuts produce prosperity.

No, Republicans may be willing to risk economic and financial crisis solely in order to deny essential health care and financial security to millions of their fellow Americans. Let’s hear it for their noble cause!
dirtbag

climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:35pm PT
They recently published Victor Hanson's racist column. TGT luuuuuuuuuvs Hanson and cuts and pastes his column here nearly every week.
dirtbag

climber
Jul 26, 2013 - 07:36pm PT
Krugman is usually right, and since Republicans are always wrong, they hate him.
Dr. F.

Boulder climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 26, 2013 - 07:44pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Messages 45041 - 45060 of total 52597 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