Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 45661 - 45680 of total 55263 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Sep 25, 2013 - 10:46pm PT
Ted Cruz is an idiot.

He voted for a bill he spent 21 hours filibustering.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Sep 25, 2013 - 10:48pm PT
How can Obama be a stupid American...He still hasn't provided a legitimate birth certificate..!
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 25, 2013 - 11:19pm PT
How Did Conservatives Get This Radical?

By THOMAS B. EDSALL


Whether they did so out of conviction or fear, House Republicans bent to the will of the dominant Tea Party faction of their party and voted 228 to 1 on Sept. 20 to make continued financing of the federal government contingent on defunding the Affordable Care Act.

Whatever you think of this strategy, the tactics are radical. How can Republicans, courting a full-fledged fiscal crisis, claim to be conservative?

Peter Wehner, who held key posts in the last three Republican presidential administrations, declares that they cannot:


This is not conservatism either in terms of disposition or governing philosophy. It is, rather, the product of intemperate minds and fairly radical (and thoroughly unconservative) tendencies.



The Wall Street Journal editorial page, normally a principled advocate of belligerent conservatism, argues that House Republicans are on a path to defeat: “Kamikaze missions rarely turn out well, least of all for the pilots,” one editorial pointed out:


We’ve often supported backbenchers who want to push G.O.P. leaders in a better policy direction, most recently on the farm bill. But it’s something else entirely to sabotage any plan with a chance of succeeding and pretend to have “leverage” that exists only in the world of townhall applause lines and fundraising letters.

Wehner and the Journal’s editorial writers might gain insight into the collective psyche of their right flank from unexpected sources: the sociologists, psychologists and political scientists who are exploring what they see as the core differences between conservatives and liberals.

Since the emergence of intensified political polarization in the late 1970s, there has been a burst of studies examining linkages between ideology, partisan identification and moral values.

Much of the more recent research in this vein suggests that Tea Party conservatives and their political leaders in and out of Congress are a special subset within the broader universe of conservatives.

Christopher Parker and Matt Barreto, who teach political science at the University of Washington, recently published “Change They Can’t Believe In: The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics in America.” They contend that there are two major strands of conservatism in America: what they call “non Tea Party,” “traditional” or “real” conservatism; and what they describe as “Tea Party,” “reactionary” or “pseudo-conservatism.”

In response to my inquiry, Parker wrote in an e-mail:


Ultimately, a conservative — in the classical sense — wishes to preserve a stable society. Of course, this includes stable institutions and observing the rule of law. For these reasons (and several more), a conservative prefers evolutionary, more incremental change to revolutionary change: revolutionary change threatens the stability conservatives seek to conserve. Hence, conservatives reluctantly accept change — so long as it isn’t revolutionary. They do so for the sake of stability and order. Moreover, for the sake of order and stability, real conservatives are amenable to political compromise with their opponents.

Conversely, according to Parker, reactionary conservatives are


backwards looking, generally fearful of losing their way of life in a wave of social change. To preserve their group’s social status, they’re willing to undermine long-established norms and institutions — including the law. They see political differences as a war of good versus evil in which their opponents are their enemies. For them, compromise is commensurate with defeat — not political expediency. They believe social change is subversive to the America with which they’ve become familiar, i.e., white, mainly male, Protestant, native born, straight. “Real Americans,” in other words.

Parker and Barreto conducted surveys to see if Tea Party conservatives differ from non-Tea Party conservatives. As the graphs in Figures 1-3 show, the two kinds of conservatives diverge significantly on key issues: immigration, civil liberties and in how they see President Obama.

more pages
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/how-did-conservatives-get-this-radical/?_r=0


Specifically, death anxiety, system instability, fear of threat and loss, dogmatism, intolerance of ambiguity, and personal needs for order, structure, and closure were all positively associated with conservatism. Conversely, openness to new experiences, cognitive complexity, tolerance of uncertainty, and (to a small extent) self-esteem were all positively associated with liberalism.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Sep 25, 2013 - 11:29pm PT
So dipwad J (dementia) Kerry SIGNED the UN TREATY - has the idiot totally lost his addled mind? Thank gawd the Senate says they wont be ratifying it.


As for Obama care, far too many people in the lower to mid income levels can not afford the MANDATED expense of healthcare, and will get penalized through IRS for as much as the stinking insurance. Wanna talk FED mandated EXTORTION?

Meanwhile companys including Hospitals are cutting back on hours of per- diem employees just like many many other companies that will lower hours to avoid paying health benefits to their employees.

Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 25, 2013 - 11:33pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Credit: Dr. F.
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 25, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
Too good to not post
A MUST READ

The Crazy Party

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: September 19, 2013 1094 Comments
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html?ref=paulkrugman


Early this year, Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, made headlines by telling his fellow Republicans that they needed to stop being the “stupid party.” Unfortunately, Mr. Jindal failed to offer any constructive suggestions about how they might do that. And, in the months that followed, he himself proceeded to say and do a number of things that were, shall we say, not especially smart.

Nonetheless, Republicans did follow his advice. In recent months, the G.O.P. seems to have transitioned from being the stupid party to being the crazy party.

I know, I’m being shrill. But as it grows increasingly hard to see how, in the face of Republican hysteria over health reform, we can avoid a government shutdown — and maybe the even more frightening prospect of a debt default — the time for euphemism is past.

It helps, I think, to understand just how unprecedented today’s political climate really is.

Divided government in itself isn’t unusual and is, in fact, more common than not. Since World War II, there have been 35 Congresses, and in only 13 of those cases did the president’s party fully control the legislature.

Nonetheless, the United States government continued to function. Most of the time divided government led to compromise; sometimes to stalemate. Nobody even considered the possibility that a party might try to achieve its agenda, not through the constitutional process, but through blackmail — by threatening to bring the federal government, and maybe the whole economy, to its knees unless its demands were met.

True, there was the government shutdown of 1995. But this was widely recognized after the fact as both an outrage and a mistake. And that confrontation came just after a sweeping Republican victory in the midterm elections, allowing the G.O.P. to make the case that it had a popular mandate to challenge what it imagined to be a crippled, lame-duck president.

Today, by contrast, Republicans are coming off an election in which they failed to retake the presidency despite a weak economy, failed to retake the Senate even though far more Democratic than Republican seats were at risk, and held the House only through a combination of gerrymandering and the vagaries of districting. Democrats actually won the popular ballot for the House by 1.4 million votes. This is not a party that, by any conceivable standard of legitimacy, has the right to make extreme demands on the president.

Yet, at the moment, it seems highly likely that the Republican Party will refuse to fund the government, forcing a shutdown at the beginning of next month, unless President Obama dismantles the health reform that is the signature achievement of his presidency. Republican leaders realize that this is a bad idea, but, until recently, their notion of preaching moderation was to urge party radicals not to hold America hostage over the federal budget so they could wait a few weeks and hold it hostage over the debt ceiling instead. Now they’ve given up even on that delaying tactic. The latest news is that John Boehner, the speaker of the House, has abandoned his efforts to craft a face-saving climbdown on the budget, which means that we’re all set for shutdown, possibly followed by debt crisis.

How did we get here?

Some pundits insist, even now, that this is somehow Mr. Obama’s fault. Why can’t he sit down with Mr. Boehner the way Ronald Reagan used to sit down with Tip O’Neill? But O’Neill didn’t lead a party whose base demanded that he shut down the government unless Reagan revoked his tax cuts, and O’Neill didn’t face a caucus prepared to depose him as speaker at the first hint of compromise.

No, this story is all about the G.O.P. First came the southern strategy, in which the Republican elite cynically exploited racial backlash to promote economic goals, mainly low taxes for rich people and deregulation. Over time, this gradually morphed into what we might call the crazy strategy, in which the elite turned to exploiting the paranoia that has always been a factor in American politics — Hillary killed Vince Foster! Obama was born in Kenya! Death panels! — to promote the same goals.

But now we’re in a third stage, where the elite has lost control of the Frankenstein-like monster it created.

So now we get to witness the hilarious spectacle of Karl Rove in The Wall Street Journal, pleading with Republicans to recognize the reality that Obamacare can’t be defunded. Why hilarious? Because Mr. Rove and his colleagues have spent decades trying to ensure that the Republican base lives in an alternate reality defined by Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Can we say “hoist with their own petard”?

Of course, the coming confrontations are likely to damage America as a whole, not just the Republican brand. But, you know, this political moment of truth was going to happen sooner or later. We might as well have it now.
WBraun

climber
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:23am PT
The failed useless regurgitated garbage of Dr Failed as usual from the shallow end of the pool.

Akamai Ghost ,,,, on how and who

From the deep end ......

rSin

Trad climber
calif
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:27am PT
afraid youll run out of desperate poor people to lord over?
dindolino32

climber
omaha, ne
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:31am PT
Cruz should have figured out the moral of "Green Eggs and Ham" before he read it to everyone! I bet he was close to the end and thinking "WTF!?!? Sam I Am actually gives in and finds out he is wrong????....... Oh shit!
LOL
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Sep 26, 2013 - 01:18am PT
Did Werner give Ron his account?
Nohea

Trad climber
Living Outside the Statist Quo
Sep 26, 2013 - 03:41am PT
Can we agree that the "law" should have to include everyone? What is being fought now is knott the "law" as it was passed. The Royal President changed the "law" as it was passed ( and how again was it passed?) so that DC really is above us all. If I'm wrong call me on it but do know Krug's , while being so intelligent cannot make a simple argument.

His teachers never told him the difference between propaganda and argumentation. Neither had this thread.
dirtbag

climber
Sep 26, 2013 - 08:44am PT

As for Obama care, far too many people in the lower to mid income levels can not afford the MANDATED expense of healthcare, and will get penalized through IRS for as much as the stinking insurance. Wanna talk FED mandated EXTORTION?


That's not what the CBO and DHS studies say.

But whatever, you've demonstrated over and over again you don't care about facts.
locker

Social climber
Some Rehab in Bolivia
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:02pm PT


"and will get penalized through IRS for as much as the stinking insurance"...



Pretty sure the above is incorrect...

But I am not real hip on what the hell is going on either...

I'm under the impression that the "Fine" would be in the $600.00 per year range for those that try and skip out or whatever...

Far from the price of regular Medical Insurance...
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:10pm PT
Locker, even with a "partial voucher" from the govt (tax dollars) there will be a billion people that wont be able to afford this REQUIRED insurance. And if they cant afford that mandated insurance, the fine is also un affordable as well. So then the IRS gets $$$$$ for basically NOTHING. The majority of those people wont even use the medical industry in a given year.
But the fact IS that many many Americans will not be able to afford this system. Making the poor poorer.
locker

Social climber
Some Rehab in Bolivia
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:15pm PT


"Locker, even with a "partial voucher" from the govt (tax dollars) there will be a billion people that wont be able to afford this REQUIRED insurance"...



Pretty sure had Obama gotten what he originally wanted that the above would not be true (Though I think you're numbers are a bit off)...

Too bad it didn't happen...

Wonder why???...





It's simple!!!...

We NEED to take care of our fellow people...

It's not as easy as, "Go get a job"...

Especially when there aren't a hell of a lot of those going around...

Not everyone can work...


We flat out NEED coverage for ALL!!!...




EDITED:

Boils down to GREED as always...



dirtbag

climber
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:19pm PT
Rong. About everything.
jghedge

climber
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:37pm PT

"and will get penalized through IRS for as much as the stinking insurance"...



1. Non-compliance penalty. Most Americans will be required to obtain qualifying health coverage by 2014 or face a penalty. The charge will gradually rise over a three-year period. In 2014, the cost will be $285 per family or 1% of household income (whichever is greater). Individual adults will pay $95. The following year, in 2015, the fee will be $975 per family or 2% of household income (whichever is greater). Individual adults will pay $325. By 2016, the cost will rise to $2,085 or 2.5% of household income (whichever is greater). Individual adults will pay $695. The penalty must be paid to the IRS along with your taxes.


At no point will the non-compliance penalty be as much as the insurance.


Why not just google "ACA noncompliance fee" instead of being an ignorant ass? Are you really just incapable of doing that?

Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:52pm PT
BS hedge,,how do YOU KNOW how much folks will be making that will be penalized.?


But tell me how this system will work when there are still a billion or more people that still wont have any health coverage, then going in debt at the end of the year to pay their fines? They will still abuse the ERs for basically FREE treatments then not pay a dime to the hospital, happens daily. Then throw in the vouchered patients and the low pay govt system and it is really easy to see why hospitals are dumping clinics, while doctors dump their practices. I can just see it now, where every person in Nevada will have only two choices for a hospital,, Reno, or Vegas. That is if you can afford to get there..
locker

Social climber
Some Rehab in Bolivia
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:55pm PT

Ron...

NOT giving you sh!t here...

Sincerely wondering where that BILLION number is coming from...

Can you post a reliable link please???...



EDIT:

Anyone...

Is Ron's number correct???...

A BILLION PEOPLE???...

???...
locker

Social climber
Some Rehab in Bolivia
Sep 26, 2013 - 12:57pm PT


"They will still abuse the ERs for basically FREE treatments then not pay a dime to the hospital, happens daily"...

Nothing new there...

Idiots being idiots doesn't change simply because health care does...



Messages 45661 - 45680 of total 55263 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