As a conservative, and I am a conservative on many issues---particularly spending and defense, I would like to see conservatives return to the principles that made the Republican Party a national party in the post-Civil War years.
That will require returning to the values and policies of Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush, and of Colin Powell, John McCain, and Mitt Romney (just to name a very few) and abandoning its reactionary, anti-democratic, anti-conservative, and anti-government, proto-anarchist faction calling itself the Tea Party.
To pass a clean budget. Preferably today. And then the farm bill. The no 1 job is to take care of business.
for it to return to its senses, both common sense and Constitutional sense.
for it to stop catering to a mean-mouthed, vengeful (for nothing), and accusatory leadership that's making it popular to pit blacks against whites, Democrats against Republicans, and Muslims against Christians.
It would take some common decency and common manners, some respect for all people as human beings.
Oh, and patriotism.
Both things which are strikingly lacking in the current Administration.
And the behavior of which Administration is increasingly being copied by average (but uncaring) citizens who think it's okay as long as Barack Obama does it. Which he does, consistently and without any self-control or remorse or accountability.
GOP TO BLAME SAYS 53% to 31%
The Republican Party has been badly damaged in the ongoing government shutdown and debt limit standoff, with a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finding that a majority of Americans blame the GOP for the shutdown,
and with the party’s popularity declining to its lowest level.
By a 22-point margin (53 percent to 31 percent), the public blames the Republican Party more for the shutdown than President Barack Obama – a wider margin of blame for the GOP than the party received during the poll during the last shutdown in 1995-96.
Just 24 percent of respondents have a favorable opinion about the GOP, and only 21 percent have a favorable viewof the Tea Party, which are both at all-time lows in the history of poll. Obama's popularity rose two percent since a month ago to 47% approval.
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 … s-gop?lite
Another lamestream media poll. Good job. I'm the conservative everyone warned you about. I'm educating liberals one at a time to turn off NBC and pay attention to the real world. Nothing But Crackhead News knows what's really going on out here, but they'll only report what Obambi WANTS you to hear. The best part is, you're too ignorant and self-absorbed to realize it.
So it was a beautiful thing today. Thousands of patriotic Americans descended on Washington DC and tore down the baricades that Obambi erected in front of the monuments around the mall. These patriots promptly dumped the barricades in front of the White House and photos were taken of vets at the foot of the now-accessible monuments. These patriots were not mad at Republican Congressional leaders and no Democrat dared showed their face at the protests. This is a huge victory for the American people and a resounding defeat for the idiot in the White House.
The same thing they've always wanted:
To be the one dominant force in the world, and for everyone to be solely subservient to them. And, of course, for the return of slavery and laissez-faire Capitalism to send 80+% of the country into crippling poverty, while shoving religion into a government that was founded and intended to be distinctively religion-free.
You must be confusing this question with the Democratic party. It wasn't the democrats who freed the slaves (read your history books, assuming of course that you CAN read) and the Democrats initiated abortion reform back in the '70's to annihilate the babies of people of color. The Republicans have always been the advocates of people of all races, supporting the free market where anyone with drive and ambition can succeed while the Democrats seek to enable anyone to be slothful and lazy. Of course you probably only understand the proganda spoon fed to you by the lamestream media. Get you head out of your behind and get a whiff of the real world. Then post when you're mature enough to understand it.
Are you capable of responding to any opinion that does not agree with yours with something other than vitriol, name-calling and bullying?
Is it possible for you to accept that in the United States we, thankfully, do not all one political and social "ideology" and that we are not required to share that one political and social "ideology" in order to be understood as literate, informed, educated, well-read, living in the real world, and mature?
At least, unlike most people who vote for Democrats, I'm not stupid enough to believe that only the Democratic Party has all the right answers. Read my post thoroughly next time before you criticize the things I say. Or are you one those aformentioned idiots who believe the Democraps can do no wrong and the Rupublicans can do no right? If you are, then I refer you to the wisdom espoused by the late great Winston Churchill who had his finger on the pulse of what is right and wrong with society. He said, "If you are under 30 and Conservative, you have no heart. If you are over 30 and liberal, then you have no brain." Based on your comment, I assume you are under 30. If you are, then come talk to me when you grow up. If you're over 30, then refer to the Churchill quote and again, come talk to me when you grow up.
Personal attacks and name-calling are not informed or mature conversation. Personal attacks and name-calling are nothing more than bullying.
And for the record: The quotation you attributed to Churchill is not a statement that he ever made. There is no record of Churchill writing or saying these words. None.
That said, Churchill's politics were complex. In terms of domestic politics he was a liberal who championed public housing, national health insurance, and the welfare state. In terms of foreign politics, he was a staunch imperialist and believed in the use of British military power to ensure its global hegemony.
The uninformed and ignorant always resort to name calling and bullying when their limited imagination bars them from a more informed argument.
Mary, what an impressive resume you have, thank God that your on our side!
Thank you for offering a supportive voice---and a voice of reason.
It seems as though the tide is turning against the Tea Party and its leader in Congress, Ted Cruz.
Apparently, he was heckled today at the Values Voters Summit and only about 14% of Americans have a FAVORABLE opinion of him since he has assumed the national stage (about 28% view him negatively; which leaves about 58% who don't have an opinion of him----likely because they have no idea who he is).
Polls also show that 50% of Americans are against defunding Obamacare and about 13% support defunding Obamacare, BUT of the 13% of Americans who do want to defund Obamacare----even that group (according to polling data) does not support Cruz's approach of refusing to fund the government in order to extort defunding of Obamacare.
As a friend of mine once remarked about politicians: "It's a short walk from the palace to the outhouse." He was very right.
I read your profile and your credentials are impressive. As an academic, though, you lack the ability to formulate logical opinions. Actually, the statement can indeed be attributed to Churchill and has been referenced many times. Academics live life in a bubble created within the shell of the institution where they either study or teach. You are incapable of understanding the "real world" until you live in it and must be content to try to solve the world's ills within the shell of the artifical society created by your institution. By the way, the first amendment grants me the freedom to express myself in any manner I see fit. Nowhere does it say I have the freedom of speech unless it happens to offend you. But that's the liberal way of thinking. Don't like the message, so you try to block the messenger.
Oh, and actually, the number of Americans that support defunding Obamacare is closer to 80%. But then again, you're probably only listening to the lamestream media again.
More rightwing propaganda? Well Bernie, fortunately for me, "Ive seen that movie, too".
Is that all you guys ever have, insults and attacks? So since Mr. Obama was elected twice you prseume that the majority of the electorate lazy? Who in hell do you people think you are? It is the rightwinger that resorts to violence because they are first to run out of ideas, but you will be soon feretted out by your own unreasonbleness before the American people and the GOp relegated to the regional party status that they have so richly earned.
Oh, we're not lazy. We just didn't feel like coming out to support a candidate who wasn't a true conservative. We need another Reagan. If Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan or Sarah Palin ran for president, I'd vote for them in a heartbeat. Ben Carson would ABSOLUTELY get my vote and he would be the worst nightmare for liberals like you becasue he doesn't support the enabling of the bottom feeders who prey on the social services system while they deal crack out of the trunks of luxury cars and praise their Obama phones and EBT allowances.
As for violence, really? Is that all you've got? Tell me again about the black mob protestors who beat up and killed numerous white pedestrians in the wake of the Zimmerman trial. Remind me about the pedigrees of the last 7 mass shootings that occurred in this country. I'll give you a hint here...the killers weren't registered Republicans. But of course the liberal media and the people who buy into it are more than content to believe that all guns are bad and that all right wing gun owners are nut jobs intent on committing felony murder so let's just take the guns away entirely. Yep, always trying to solve the problems in society by passing more and more unenforceable laws.
When will you get it? The founding fathers intentionally made the federal government small to prevent the liberal totalitarianist thinking that seems to pervade Washington DC. The government has no business making healthcare a mandatory expense for the American people and it has no business taxing people for refusing to partake in a program they don't want. The American revolution was fought over the concept of taxation without representation. The next revolution will be fought for the same reasons, and we, the people, will continue to fight it with our pens and our computers. But make no mistake. We will keep our guns as a last resort. And when the time comes, you haven't seen the violence that We the People are capable of yet. But when the camels back is broken, rest assured you will.
That sure is a fancy way of saying "poor people don't deserve to live"...
I never said anything about "poor people" as you so eloquently called them. I have no problem helping someone who is down on their luck with getting back on their feet. I do have a problem continually supporting a class of people who refuse to get back up and rejoin the march. If you don't want to work, then starve. If you are willing to work, it's the government's responsibility to get out of the way of job creation, not pass laws every five minutes that make it more and more difficult for new jobs to be created.
Do you realize that in Ronald Reagan's third year in office, October 1983 saw 1.3 million jobs created in this country and unemployment was at an all-time low. The net job market has seen significant losses since this cheese took office. Reagan said it best - "The best social program is a job." Obambi seems to think that killing jobs and creating a larger welfare class is a good idea. At some point, though, the money will run out and what then? Mark my words - that's when the revolution will occur. And 1776 will pale in overall comparison.
Right, you guys go ahead and run these people and see if they can be elected!
Do, I have to add racist to your list of accomplishments. Same old tired right wing bromides, huh? Gotta get you all properly consigned to the loony bins where you belong? You people disgust me and always will, and we will prevail against you over time, the numbers are pointing that direction, just watch now, wait and see. We need another Ronald Reagan like we need another Katrina. I can see like most rightwingers there is a great deal of racial resentment as part of your dogma. You don't even conceal it very well. Since you are SUCH a genius you should have been able to discern that violence is not necessarily physical. I did not say anything about the 2nd amendment, how did that come up? You do have a lotta burs under your saddle, don't you?
I am for the least imposing government possible consistent with order and fairness for all of us that have to live in your world where geniuses like you want to lord it over on all the rest of us poor mental deficients. The people have spoken, ACA is the law, if you don't like it use the system the founding fathers created to amend or repeal it. Don't you mistake the obvious reasonableness of the progressives as weakness. I think you will find that "We the People" constitutes just you and a handful on the lunatic rightwing fringe.
As far as which party legalized abortion, Gov. Reagan signed a liberalization law in California. The Burger Court, with a GOP majority, handed down Roe v Wade. One of the two dissenting Justices was Byron White, a Democrat.
Yes, but subsequently after changing parties, former Governor Reagan became one of the staunchest voices for the unborn. The Burger court not withstanding, even Republicans make bad decisions once in a while. Roberts decision to leave Obambicare in the hands of Congress for instance may be laudable but flawed. He should have pulled the plug when he had the chance. The fight is back in Congress where it belongs and the Republicans have an obligation not to cave in to the extottion by our president (note the small 'p') and the Senate under Harry Greed.
Lol, yeah. Conservatives want slavery. Some people...
I want Republicans to act like conservatives again. Bush was one of the worst spenders we've ever had, until Obama came along.
Actually, in deference, Bush was a penny pincher compared to the moron we have now.
Starting a useless and costly war with Iraq is penny pinching? Plus Bush had no exit plan and no means to pay for it! Way to go, idiots!!!
== Bush was a penny pincher compared to Obama ==
Bush inherited a balanced budget from Clinton and proceeded to jack up deficits throughout his tenure. Obama inherited the biggest budget deficit in history, and has since reduced it. That's the inconvenient truth.
After listening to the President talk for ten minutes, why does he talk in sentence fragments, I would like him to quit campaigning and start giving some specifics. He blames the republicans and the tea party. He keeps talking about congress going ahead to vote then blames Boehners . He doesn't say anything about what he wants them to vote on and he didn't say," Reid take a vote". He blames and blames and blames. Is there anyone out there who is actually signed up for the Affordable Healthcare Insurance program?
Apparently enough to crash the system just hours after it opened.
I managed to price an insurance plan through the exchange. The same plan I'm currently paying $70 a month for will now cost me $372 through Obambi care. I love the Pelosi quote that "we have to pass the law before we'll know what's in it". Good job, you cow. Now that we know what's in it, can we can your ass and get someone in your place who might actually do the job right? Like a Republican, perhaps?
At least 100,000 people and counting have been able to secure accounts.
The fact is that so many people have attempted to sign-up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act that they have crashed the system and required that it be overhauled to deal with what is apparently totally unexpected volumes of traffic.
That's complete bunk. They are incompetent, and trying to make their failure out to be a good thing. Their website sucks, it was a complete failure, not a demonstration of success.
Private companies are able to handle traffic that is thousands of times greater than that with no problem at all.
So, what you are saying is that NO private company ever experiences any problems handling traffic on their webpage?
If you understood even the basics of webpage design---including parameters for handling traffic, you would understand that sites are designed to deal with a specified volume of traffic over given and defined intervals. You would also understand, if you understood even the basics of webpage maintenance, that if volume exceeds capacity over the given interval, then the site will "crash".
It happens everyday.
Here is a list of websites that "crashed" during the last Super Bowl due to excessive traffic:
"The Walking Dead" (film site)
"The Lone Ranger", "Fast and Furious 6", and "Star Trek" (film sites)
That said, and again if you understood the basics, you would be critical of those who worked with designers to create the site who clearly underestimated initial demand and traffic volumes and whose underestimate was responsible for the site's significant and continuing issues dealing with traffic.
I do understand, and websites can be designed to be easily scaled. When a company's website crashes, they are generally able to fix it within a matter of hours, instead of our government whose website still can't work after a week.
And it's not even close to the same thing. The gov website didn't crash due to traffic. They designed a traffic management system to reduce load, so it would only let so many people on at a time. That worked, but the system still didn't work. It didn't work for the number of people they designed it for.
It's incompetence. They probably didn't prepare for the number of visitors, and their implementation simply didn't work. If you worked in IT for one of those big companies and did this, you would lose your job.
In the UK whenever the government instates a large computer system it uses private contractors.
Do you want a list of such schemes that have failed? Some even scrapped before they got off the ground.
Anyone who fails this badly, government or private, is incompetent.
Have you ever heard of scaling? Stress testing? It's really not that hard to do.
In my experience, government contractors are generally connected and incompetent... as a rule.
I just don't care, it's incompetence and I don't have much patience for it. People who work for me do what they need to do, or they don't work for me. People don't take as much pride in their work, and too many people don't demand it anymore.
Analogous, government= inefficiency + incompetence. One can imagine Obama"care"!
Agreed, but by definition contractors are not the government.
Check it in your dictionary.
It's the government's webpage. Regardless of who did the work, it's still the government's job to oversee it. The incompetence is to be shared by everyone who was in charge of the project. You honestly just make crap up to argue over, crap that was never said by anybody.
I personally have overseen software launches that handled hundreds of millions of queries in its first week, and was able to do so with nothing worse than a hiccup.
Seriously, I've never had to pay attention to who I'm talking to on a forum before, so I keep forgetting.
Do you just enjoy stirring up stuff? Nothing you posted even made sense, it was like you are having a different conversation.
It would help you considerably if you did pay attention to other people on the forums.
it would probably help other people as well.
It doesn't matter. All that matters is what you say.
The only reason it matters to pay attention is so I can avoid getting into these stupid conversations with you.
You said that sometimes it's contractors. Ok, I said it doesn't matter who screws up, it's still a screw up. Then you say 'tell that to the contractors'. What does that even mean? Then you say contractors and government are different, like I had ever said differently.
Don't worry, one of these days I'll remember to stop replying to you.
I TOLD you to IGNORE .......IGNORE! John has NOTHING to contribute!
The bottom line is this. If government got out of the way of job creation instead of creating bills like the so called 'Affordable' Care Act, more people would have full time jobs with privately funded insurance plans and OH MY GOD - WHAT A CONCEPT! Obamacare would never have been necessary. Don't any of you liberals get it yet? Govenment is TOO BIG ALREADY! And then to give this law to the IRS to enforce? Obambi is a retard, pure and simple.
Oh, yeah, and I'm a racist for saying it. The race card again? Is that all you've got? I don't have to be a racist. The two biggest ones out there are Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Personally, I support Ben Carson, Herman Cain and Allen West, all of whom are real role models for the black population. Instead, they cling to the belief that they are a downtrodden people because that's what Sharpton and Jackson want them to be - slaves to the idea of failure which is why they will continue to fail unless they start listening to true leaders who can help them 'pull themselves up by their own bootstraps'. You can take your race card and I'll give three guesses where you can stick it.
As a black person do you presume for me who my role models should be? More right wing sutff, Mr. Genius? Who am I but someone of the unwashed masses and insolent rabble to dare call you out? You're ridiculous, if this were a sit-com, your very presense would constitute a laugh track
Only you can determine who your role models should be. But if I were you, as a black man, I would carefully evaluate the quality of the role models I had in front of me.
On the one hand, you have two rabble rousers who are constantly nit-picking about how poorly people of color are treated by the 'white ruling class'. They continually remind you that you are gutter scum and that you must rise up and overthrow your white masters. Heck, even Martin Luther King Jr. would have been offended by what his legacy has become today.
On the other hand, there are three fine examples of humanity who want black people to stop acting like victims and seize their destinies not by overthrowing the 'white regime' but by earning the respect of the world by being a proactive part of it.
Like I said, you can choose your own role models, but I will judge you by the company you keep. And if you think I'm the laugh track, that must make you the joke.
Something funny from another question. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinio … 7479.story
Also, yes, the people who didn't prepare the website for its influx are morons. Probably work for Dell. However, you have to admit that if the Affordable Care Act was so terrible, I'd say there are millions of people who disagree with you.
Of course, on any issue there are going to be millions of people who disagree with any stance. There are millions who will agree or disagree with something based on who you claim supports it. Tons of people are extremely low information voters.
You can see it in both parties. Someone asks "Obama wants to do this, do you support it" and they will say no. Then the person tells them Bush actually did it, and they start trying to backpedal. Same thing when you switch Obama for Bush.
I don't really care about the opinions of uninformed people. That's exactly why this country wasn't made as a Democracy.
You are correct that we're not supposed to be just a democracy.
We were formed as a Republic, a democratic Republic. (Notice I didn't capitalize "democratic" because we're not talkin' political Parties here, we're talkin' forms of government.
Political terms change with time, but at no point has America ever been considered a 'democracy'.
If we were a democracy, there would be no constitutional limits on the government. By today's definition, you could call a non-restricted republic a democracy, but not a constitutional republic like ours.
"A democratic republic is a country that is both a republic and a democracy. It is one where ultimate authority and power is derived from the citizens."
I'm inclined to agree with you, I think.....
I think there may be some confusion in the term "democratic". What I mean by "democratic" is the will of the majority AFTER and WHILE the rule of Law is applied. That rule of Law is, of course, our Constitution, which a Republic adheres to. Or should adhere to as the basis for all our Laws.
I hope that makes sense the way I've explained it.
And you're right, there's no legal mention of America being a "democracy" in our founding rules.
What has happened over the years, though, is that many Americans have bought into the lie that we're a "democracy".
This video is pretty great, I think, very explanatory and simple to understand.
I believe all Americans should take note of it.
Yep, we need to keep our Republic. Especially we need to realize that our own "President" is trying to re-define it and change it into something it was never meant to be. Someone needs to teach the current Administration how to properly interpret our Constitution. It's a real shame when a supposed-lawyer and supposedly-brilliant man like Obama is supposed to be, has no mind nor intellect to properly interpret the Constitution, while an average citizen like myself, or you, or anyone else who can read and understand simple language and its nuances, does have that ability.
Between the restrictions on who can vote(part I agree with, part I don't), and the original intent of the electoral college, it's very clear that the founders didn't like a democracy. They wanted an electoral college that was educated to prevent people like "I hate obamacare but love the ACA" from deciding who leads the country.
The problem with you rightwingers is that you dont recognize that everybody's opinion counts as this is still a country where the people rule. 'Uninformed in your opinion'. Where does your arrogance assume that you and your reactionary friends are so much smarter than the rest of us? The formula for tyranny and subsequent fascism is a fundamental part of the political right.
So majority rules, Obama was reelected, so the rightwinger on is the back burner, justifiably so.
"reactionary"? "Tyranny and subsequent fascism"? From a group of people that want as little government as is possible and still be consistent with a healthy, thriving country? So the majority always rules, and the constitutional protections for the people are always subject to that rule?
Maybe they assume that they are smarter because they are...
'Maybe they assume that they are smarter because they are..'
Yes, for you Wilderness, but that is not good enough for the rest of us and we are not going to make such a concession to the arrogance of the right without taking issue. .
Their idea of as little government as possible is no government at all, the left and right are hopelessly at odds as to where to draw these lines.
It's ironic that the group who assumes it's better informed than the rest of us contains many who think cllimate change and evolution are liberal plots. This group contains the highest percentage of Americans who still believe Saddam had WMDs and was involved in 9/11..
Funny how that was proven out after he died, isn't it?
Yeah, Paul, These guys are so much smarter than the rest of us, but wrap themselves in ignorance much like I would a warm blanket. A trip to the psychiatrist's sofa would be a possible solution for them.
We ARE better informed. Because we don't just listen to the lamestream media.
That is your opinion, what is your alternative, Rush Limbaugh or Fox News?
I get my news from a variety of sources. I check, verify, then recheck the sources and yes, Rush and Fox News just happen to be two of those sources. Others are on the internet and I have been known to listen to the lamestream media on occasion too when they aren't broadcasting the latest Lindsey Lohan rehab relapse. When all is said and done, though, I guarantee I have listened to more and different sources than you have and that I am absolutely better informed than the average liberal.
Yeah, we're on the backburner alright. That's why the right took back the House in 2010. And we'll keep it again in 2014. With any luck, we'll take the Senate, too. Speaking of which, the Senate never should have been elected in the first place. If they were still appointed by the states as they were prior to passage of the 17th amendment, laws like Obambicare never would have passed since the Senators would have been responsible to states rights rather than beholden to a "grateful electorate" like they are now.
Think I'm wrong about keeping the House? All we need to do is look at history to see why. In 2009, bimbo Nancy Pelosi had the audacity to say "We need to pass the healthcare law before we'll know what's in it." A typical liberal - don't do the job, get paid anyway, then blame other people when the work isn't done.
I think the 17th amendment, direct election of senators, is fine with me, don't want you and your aristocratic, genius types to have another way to thwart the desires of the people, you know, the majority, the man in the street? Some of us move beyond the 19th century elitist mindset, but obviously many of my countrymen have not. In any case, it is dead in the water. With this foolishness regarding closing of the government and the debt limit, the stench will rise from the GOP brand that legislators in districts where democrats are competitive will lose. So ends the domination of the tea-party adherents in the House of Reps.
Keep dreaming. There are still a lot more smart voters out there than there are liberal democrats.
Obama won by the largest margin over his opponent since Clinton beat Dole in '96. The trend is going against you and your party, but you want to stay in a state of denial, OK! I would not hold my breath waiting for all those 'smart votes' you babble about...
About dreaming, don't forget to clean the sheets after yours.......
Obama may have won, but the last Congressional race saw the Democrats gain two seats and lose one for a net gain of - wait for it - ONE! And next time around the Congressional races will still see Republicans in control of the house. After all, the last time the liberals were in control unilaterally, we got Obamacare. And who knows what this liberal extremist totalitarianist has in mind for this country during his lame duck final two years if he's allowed to run unchecked.
The true litmus test will be Wednesday's senate race in Jersey. If the democrat wins, I will be very surpirsed indeed. Not shocked, given that he's outspending his Republican challenger 10 to 1, but very surprised, given the rampant overspending Jersey has seen with Democrats in charge.
By the way, is anyone else here surprised that Detroit went bankrupt after 30 years of unchecked Democratic leadership? And didn't I hear that a former Democratic Mayor just was sentenced to prison for tax evasion? How does the saying go? Do as I say...?
Bernie, isolated examples does not a pattern make. The democrat is favored in New Jersey, a blue state, without question. Your party is much more corrupt, elitist and aristocratic, you must be kept out of power with every effort more enlighted people can employ. I trust Obama's instincts over any rightwing candidate anytime. I just don't trust ya,
He may be favored in your leftist lame stream media polls, but never count on the people to make the wrong decision for you. We'll see how the cards fall on Wednesday night.
By the way, you do realize that over 70% of the richest Americans on Forbes 500 are actually Democrats. You think the right is corrupt? At least our politicians have the courtesy to resign from public office when they're caught in scandals. Yours just keep on whacking off for the cameras, like AWeiner and ESpitzer. It was only a matter of time before they got covered in their own splatback.
Yeah, just like your Fox News and Karl Rove, was predicting a Romney victory last November?
Your a movie guy, what was it that was quoted in the film "Trading Places', Karl Rove says, 'turn the machines back on'...... You guys were pretty ridiculous, denying evidence that was clear for the 'lamestream media' and most everybody else that Romney was going to lose... Remember that?
Well, this Booker character is cruising for a bruising. Isn't it ironic that even BEFORE he's elected, this pussweed is already texting hookers and being a general embarassment to not only the Democratic party but the state of New Jersey as well? I suspect that, even if he wins, he'll get his butt handed to him time after time after time in the real media. And you liberals see nothing wrong with this reject from a fantasy flush.
Yep, go ahead and proudly parade him around your circles. You're proving your caliber each and every election. And the fact that you would support this piece of cheese also tells me everything I need to know about you too. Suffice to say, I wouldn't walk in your circles nor would I LET you walk in mine. I only associate with people of character and integrity. That pretty much rules out all liberals.
You heard it here, folks:
Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Martin Luther King Jr. lack character and integrity, whereas Herbert Hoover, J. Edgar Hoover, and Richard Nixon are bursting with character and integrity.
Last I checked, Honest Abe was a Republican, bud. But then again, what do I know about history. I've only lived in this country all my life.
Lincoln had many racist views. He talked about deportation of black people and the fact that he did not support equality. Martin Luther King had infidelity and trust issues. FDR wasn't perfect either. Name a person, and we can find imperfections.
What's your point?
I hear you Zelkiiro, this Bernie fellow is out of this world. You are unbelievable Bernie, you got your entire tapestry of history on ass backwards! This must be Candid Camera!
Perhaps, but I believe that politics should bear some resemblance to morality. And morality shouldn't include the right of one man to pick another man's pocket. I don't believe in slavery, but how is that any different from the indentured servitude that people place themselves in when they go to work 40 hours a week for a pittance and live paycheck to paycheck just to pay the bills?
In essence, social services are a different form of indentured servitude. By allowing yourself to fall below the threshold where you become dependant on the hand-out, you have essentially made yourself a slave to the government. And you deserve the situation that you have dealt yourself.
People have been pulling themselves out of indentured servitude for years. But before you can do that, you have to be willing to do that. Our government doesn't WANT you to be independent. They want you to be as dependent on their services as much as possible so you keep electing stupid people into office whose only goal is to put you on a proverbial leash.
Even the educational system is geared to make you a pawn in the bigger game. And that's the beauty of it. When you are dependent on the money they give you and the media for your misinformation, you will never amount to anything in the big picture of the world. And when you die, you will, deservedly, not be remembered by anyone of significant note.
I have already spent far too long on this 'conversation' in my effort to re-educate you in how the real world works. Now I have more important things to get to. I have a novel to complete and three businesses to run. I also have to write three articles for my local newspapers. Go ahead and continue to pick apart everything I've said. I'd wager, though, that you just aren't bright enough to understand it, but you'll continue to insult, prod and poke at my conservatism without learning a thing from it. I like talking to people with open minds, but it's starting to sound like yours are nailed shut. The only thing missing is the formaldehyde.
You don't believe in servitude but you happily support a system that does!
Are you really so naive as to believe that most people choose to live on welfare? it is the system that you support that puts them in that position.
No, not your government, your capitalist masters who want the taxpayer to support their businesses.
Hey, Hollywood isn't news media you know. Stop watching those films.
You haven't the first clue about how the real world works and nothing to teach anybody here, not even the resident right wingers
It is you who does not understand.
Hey, John, first of all, I don't support the system that promotes the welfare state. I'm all for putting the lazy back to work. The only problem is, our leaders have farmed out the worked to third world nations at the behest of the large corporations who don't want to deal with American unions. Personally, I don't blame the corporations. I blame Billy Clinton for letting it happen.
Dude, I happen to well paid and self employed. I got myself out of 'the system' as you call it. It's possible for anyone with the ambition, the goal and the dream to be free.
By the way, I only review movies because of - get this - they pay me to do it. Get it yet?
Now, go give your queen a pedicure. And stay out of American politics. You haven't a clue of how this real world works.
This isn't fantasy land. Conservatives oppose freebee welfare.
Please read Mr EA, I didn't say he supported the welfare system, I said that he supports the system that makes welfare necessary.
And shouldn't you tell movie guy that this isn't fantasy land?
I did read. I just didn't read anything in your post that was realistic. I believe he made some valid, worthy points. Sorry.
What! Are you denying that the guy is a conservative?
Do you read what people write?
No, I am embracing the fact that he has some conservative ideas. As I already said, he made some valid points.
Yes, you said nothing in my post was realistic so then I asked if you denied that he was a conservative, which you must do if you say that there was nothing realistic in my post.
Let's get on with the debate. This is a waste of time.
No problem with some jerk trolling but as soon as somebody pulls him up on it . . .
You love to call people names when you disagree with them. It's childish to do this. Let's debate.
How much should Starbucks pay in taxes? How has this company avoided paying taxes? Care to prove your claim?
But is it more or less childish to resort to the report button when what you say doesn't find favour?
I provided you with a link in another thread, but here it is again -
now let's debate.
Yes, your politicians step down after been found out and knowing that they will be fired. So, don't make angels out of them, they are anything but....
I'm not. But yours seem to think that the people should forget about their misdeeds and re-elect them anyway even though they soliciti prostitutes or expose themselves online.
By the way, I find it amusing that four out five stories about corrupt politicians tend to be about democrats. Sort of says something about the quality of the people who run for office on the Democratic ticket. If they're tax evaders, embezzlers, child molesters, wife beaters or slum lords, they know with absolute certainty that they can get elected as a democrat. And you say our side is corrupt. Really? is that all you've got?
Go home. Your mommy's calling you.
So, everything---every comment you have posted to this hub, says essentially one thing: The best that you can do is mock and bully.
To Credence2: Exactly! I've gotten nothing but bullies telling me that I am "uninformed", ignorant, uneducated, and worse; nothing but arrogant efforts to shut down any diversity of thought.
Ah, a breath of fresh air! Mbuggieh, its just like the reactionary to promote the idea that some folks are more equal than others, right out of 'Anmal Farm'. Well, I am not buying it!
The idea that some people are "more equal than others" or that there is no room for intelligent and informed disagreement is nonsense and entirely anathema to the American way of life.
The pervasiveness of the notion that there is one right interpretation of facts and events, one "right" way of governing, one right ideology, one right set of policies, etc. and that everything else is the product of some imagined lack of education of some imagined lack of information or some imagined lack of intelligence is quite shocking and, as you note, right out of "Animal Farm".
And this sole possession of the 'right way' is chapter and verse ,found in the rightwing playbook. The beasts in the House right now have taken this attitude to throw the baby out with the bathwater instead of responsible debate and compromise that has been the time honored method of a legislative body. This responsible legislative process has been true in the past even during the most intense partisan disagreements, but now the reactionaries have gone too far.....
A agree. I just read an editorial from a Republican/Tea Party CNN pundit (S. E. Cupp) basically attacking Paul Ryan for stepping up to the plate and trying to actually work out a deal---actually govern.
I suspect that the public will read the Tea Party and its Republican Party allies for what it is and abandon them in the 2014 elections. The Republicans in Congress are taking a beating over what some extremists in their ranks have caused.
True, this can't be sustainable over the long term. The GOP are broken up into Libertarians, traditionalists and the reactionaries, represented by Paul, Christie, Cruz, respectively. They are going to rip themselves apart and they won't have the 'lamestream media' to blame for what they will do to themselves. Knowing that they cannot win elections on the merit of their ideas, they will cheat with voter supression and gerrymandered districts.
You have heard that most of the rightwingers in the House justify their existence by being more obstinant rather than less, or face an even more ridiculously rightwing challenger in their districts. So, the idea of compromise and legislating responsibly is the last thing on their minds. I can only hope that the national anger will drive pressure to remove GOP reps in more moderate districts, ultimately vanquishing the power of the handful of miscreants.
In many ways what we are seeing is a Republican Party without a national base. In other words, no "national" Republican Party.
We saw this in the 1850s with the Democratic Party that allowed itself to be controlled by pro-slavery extremists in the South and in the North---particularly among Irish Catholic immigrants in New York City and Boston, etc. By the mid-1850s there was no "national" Democratic Party.
The result for the Democrats in terms of post-Civil War national elections:
No Democrat was elected President Grover Cleveland in 1884. The Democrats had become not just the party of slavery, but much more importantly the party of political extremism in the form of sectionalism, nullification, and states' rights.
Indeed, from one historian to another, we observe that history can and does repeat itself. It is interesting to observe that between 1865-1932 there were two men who were elected president from the Democratic party, Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson....
That's what is called the checks and balances of government. The only party in this fight taking the "my way or the highway" approach is that individual in the white house.
No Bernie, the government has no business making healthcare mandatory. You guys are fine with car insurance being mandatory, but healthcare, no. That's "socialist".
Actually, only liability insurance is mandatory in most states. That way, if you hit my car, your insurance company pays me for the damage you caused. If I don't have healthcare, how does that affect you?
Are we all supposed to pay for you if you are in an accident and health professionals find you mangled around a light pole? Do you want to be left for dead? The reality is that health care is something we all require and that reality ultimately costs the taxpayer. Like taking in oxygen, certain aspects of human existence are inevitable and to think that we are all not going to pay for these things in one form or another is most naive. We can no longer afford to subsidize people who do not have health insurance, do you prefer to let them die or go untreated? That is not the markings of a civilized society....
Put people back to work full time and let them pay for their own health insurance like I do. That solves the problem. Oh, and by the way, the only healthcare insurance I want or need is catastrophic health care coverage. I don't go to the doctor for every cold and hangnail like some people do. If I go for a checkup, I pay my way out of my own pocket, not pick the pockets of my fellow taxpayers like some people do. Maybe it isn't "civilized" as you put it, but I am all for survival of the fittest. Darwin really did have some things right. Parasites will continue to be parasites until their victims are bled dry. I'm just a victim who chooses to fight back in my way.
"Nowhere does it say I have the freedom of speech unless it happens to offend you. But that's the liberal way of thinking. Don't like the message, so you try to block the messenger."
Oh, that's rich. Care to count he number of times your species has tried to silence dissenting opinions through forcing religion on others or referring to those who disagree with you as "traitors" or "unamerican"?
Bernie, would you kindly provide proof that 80% of Americans support funding Obamacare? It sounds to me like you're one of those people who refuses to believe anything that doesn't jive with your narrow-minded, conspiratorial, xenophobic worldview. Also, if this statistic were true, then wouldn't 80% of Americans be on board with the Republicans? You're full of crap.
I bet you use the word "communist" more than you use the word "intelligent". Tell me, can you even explain what communism is with out Googling it first? Yeah, didn't think so.
With an IQ of 167, I don't have to google the definition of Communism to know that it is the wrong direction for America. Come talk to me again when you grow up.
As for the 80% statistic, all you have to do is be willing to talk to people. In my day to day life, I talk to hundreds of people and not all of them are Republicans. Fewer than one in five of the folks I talk to are enamored by Obamacare. Are you willing to do the same litmus test? Then do the math yourself.. And before you say, "the pollsters do it for me", they may indeed give you the facts you want to hear, but that doesn't mean they are asking the right question.
To illustrate that example, I refer to a poll question asked by a state legislator here in New York. He asked if people supported the governor's womens health bill which includes a provision to expand third trimester abortion in this state. The results of his poll said overwhelmingly that over 70% of his constituency said that they supported the bill. I took a sampling of 250 random registered voters from all parties in his district and asked the point blank question of whether they supported the expansion of third trimester abortion in New York. Many had no idea of what third trimester abortion even was until I explained it to them and then overwhelmingly over 90% of the respondents who I questioned resoundingly said no.
Polls are only as good as the question that is asked, so when you tell me that most Americans are in favor of an invasive repugnant law like Obamacare, I'm inclined to believe that the wrong question was asked.
Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius, let me know when you are ready for a refund for all the 'Acme" stuff you bought
So Bernie, your evidence for the 80% statistic is that you talked to people? The only reason you don't want to actually refer to facts is because the "lame stream media" and pollsters don't give YOU what YOU want to hear. So, rather than admit you're making things up, you simply resort to attacking the credibility of the source. If any of these same sources, be it media or polls, agreed with you, you'd be all over that, quoting it left, right and center.
"...so when you tell me that most Americans are in favor of an invasive repugnant law like Obamacare, I'm inclined to believe that the wrong question was asked."
Yes, because how could anyone POSSIBLY simply disagree with you. That just can't be right. What evidence can you provide that the question was asked incorrectly? Oh, right, nothing. What else can you pull out of thin air? Let's see...
Good for you, you have an IQ of 167. That doesn't mean you know what communism is, nor did you provide a explanation. I certainly don't argue that communism is a bad form of government. It's flawed beyond reason, but tweaking private healthcare laws to provide affordable healthcare for all is NOT communism. Despite this glaring fact, you and your allegedly high IQ still equate Obamacare to communism and say it's the "wrong direction" for the country. Frankly, I think your IQ, like the 80% statistic you quoted, is just something you made up to lend credibility to your extremism. You don't back up your statements and throw red herrings everywhere. Anyone here can see you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Credence, what many of these right-wing nutjobs don't seem to understand is that the U.S. pays more per capita for healthcare costs than any other developed nation where universal healthcare exists. In fact, healthcare costs in the U.S. take up over 17% of the GDP.
How do you do, Alex? Thanks for the timely link to help support the point that if this problem is not dealt with, it will bring our entire economy to a halt. Instead of offering solutions, they go to their code books and accuse those trying to address the problem as socialists and communists. First rule of thumb: Never confuse a rightwinger with the facts! In the face of this reality about the dangers of ignoring this problem we do not want to discard the idea of a beginning in favor of a 'perfect system'.
I'm from Canada, and I'll admit that our healthcare system isn't perfect, but it certainly works better than what the U.S. has going. All I can say is that had it not been for our system, I know at least three people who would be either dead or bankrupt. As for yours truly, having a history of epilepsy means I wouldn't even have been able to get health insurance in the U.S. When I hear B.S. from right-wingers about people wanting handouts because they're "lazy", I want to scan my university and college diplomas, turn them into rubber stamps and then slam them in the faces of conservatives. I'd also like to note that the people who think Obamacare came from the depths of Satan's butthole are the people who either have cushy jobs or great benefits. Ask, say, a mother of three working two jobs to support her kids and you'll get a very different story...oh wait, she doesn't deserve healthcare. She's lazy.
So, Canada's system is better than the US helathcare system? Really? That explains why so many people cross the border to get coverage for serious illnesses because they have to wait three years for the same care in Canada, right?
Oh, and that mother of three you just spoke of? She had great coverage for an affordable rate until Obamacare was launched and her comapny cut her hours. Godd job, right? Idiots.
Well, if you care so much about cutting spending, you'll be in favor of universal healthcare. The numbers don't lie. Oh wait, that's "communist".
And yes, some people who have tons of money do go over the border to get treatment faster, but I've never seen anyone wait three years for an important procedure. The people I referenced in my previous post, one had ovarian cancer and another needed a triple bypass. They received treatment within months. Some procedures might have a longer waiting list, but I ask you this: what's the point in having the healthcare available if you can't afford it? Despite the supposed flaws you've convinced yourself about, the life expectancy in Canada is higher than that of the U.S. (see the link I left).
Oh, so you blame OBAMACARE for having people's hours cut? No, don't even go there. Those were conscious choices made by penny-pinching executives. Not every company did this. Starbucks, for example, didn't make any alterations to its benefits or employee hours. On the other hand, Papa John of Papa John's pizza (who lives in a castle, by the way) cut employee's hours because providing healthcare to his employees would require a price hike of a whopping 14 CENTS per pizza. You and the rest of your species make me sick.
Don't go blaming Obamacare for the actions of cheap companies screwing people over. And you say your IQ is 167. Right. Idiots.
Any business owner will make smart and prudent decisions based on a variety of factors that dictate to his business. But the most stringent of those requirements generally come from the government. Case in point.
The Democrats of New York's legislature recently made overtures to raising the state's minimum wage to $9.00 an hour. Here's how I, as a business owner would handle it.
If my employees are currently making $7.00 at 40 hours a week, that means that I am currently paying them $280.00 for their services before taxes each week. When the minimum wage goes up, I will have to pay them $360.00 a week brfore taxes.
Unfortunately from 2 PM until about 6 PM my store is not busy. So if an employee wants to work 40 hours, I will let them come in from 10 AM to 2 PM then leave and come back from 6 PM until 10 PM. If there store is not busy that late, though, I might send them home early. Alternatively, I will cut their hours to 30 a week (a net loss of $10 a week to their paychecks, plus I no longer need to give them healthcare...but then again, they've got Obamacare anyway, so they don't need to pick my pocket for that anyway).
Bottom line? Smart business owners always have a way to counter government intrusion into their operations. Too bad that liberals and government just don't understand or get it
That's fine, and then when you can't find a loyal or qualified worker to deal with the whiny customers all day, you can enjoy running a cash register while you try to stock the shelves. Of course, that assumes that anyone would want to shop at a place that treats its employees so poorly.
Well that's the beauty of a depressed economy. There are always people willing to work, even for the paltry sums of money companies are willing to pay. I rarely see bare shelves at Walmart and they're constantly firing people who don't want to work for the hours or money that Wally-World pays. But I still see plenty of blue vests around the store. Too bad they're always more interested in chatting with each other than waiting on customers.
The only way to improve the situation is to get government out of the business of over-regulating business. Let the free market thrive. Companies that don't or won't pay decent wages will lose good employees to companies that do and businesses will be more competitive when they're hiring decent help.
Instead, our government and the unions are driving decent paying jobs out of the country thanks to NAFTA (Hooray to Hillbilly Clinton for that one) and our current administration would rather put people on welfare than back to work. Socialism is rearing it's ugly head in this country. If you want to support the poor and lazy with your paycheck, please feel free to donate everything you own or earn to the nearest charity. I'll even let you pay my fair share, if that's what you want to do. I prefer to keep the money that I make in my pocket. I'll support the people and causes that I want to. And that doesn't include people who made the life choice to live in a cardboard box rather than ask for help.
By the way, if that guy in the cardboard box wanted a job, I'd give him one if he's willing to work. And I'd pay him $10 an hour under the table when he proved to me that he was worth it.
" I'm the conservative everyone warned you about".
On that, I agree with you.
"The best part is, you're too ignorant and self-absorbed to realize it."
Irony alert from Bernie "My IQ is 167" the MovieGuy.
"I check, verify, then recheck the sources and yes, Rush and Fox News just happen to be two of those sources."
Did I just hear a toilet flush? I think that's your credibility making its exit.
Hey look, wind your necks in.
Look at his name, he is Bernie the movie guy
I thought this was a discussion of American politics. Who invited the Brit? Didn't we kick their butts over 200 years ago? Want us to take another crack at it, Johnny boy?
Gee Bernie, for a genius, you ain't too bright. "kick butts over 200 years ago".
Perhaps it is way past your bedtime, why do you just play with the Sesame Street apps, your mom gave you, and leave adult conversations to adutls!
" I don't go to the doctor for every cold and hangnail like some people do."
Good to know, seeing as many terminal illnesses have seemingly benign symptoms at first. With any luck, Darwinian natural selection will get a crack at you.
It's had fifty years to try. Good thing for me, my ancestry has long life spans. You should expect me to live well into my 90's. My ancestors didn't visit doctors either. I don't have a lot of trust for them. Coincidentally, though, I did vow that, if I know I'm going to go, I plan to take as many liberals with me as I can to even the score. Too bad you don't live near me.
But the reality is that you could die tomorrow. You may be a genius but not a master of life or death. More arrogance? You talk about violence, what did you mean that you were going to take liberals 'with you' to even the score. I dd not think that anyone was keeping score. Is that how you righties think? Why don't you take your frustration on Darwin and natural selection, after all you brought it up.
I would, but liberals have made it easier for those without wits to survive. That's why there's such a proliferation of liberals.
You're right. I could die tomorrow. But you liberals aren't likely to be that lucky.
You say that you have a high IQ , but wisdom, which reflects itself in humility is lacking in you and neutralizes any inteligence that you boast about. You are one pompous arrogant fellow. But again there are those nit-wits that are not smart enough to recognize that they too could find themselves in a vulnerable position at any time.
Thank you for that advice, Credence. And you are right. Any of us could find ourselves in a situation that we cannot control at any time. But I also subscribe to the adage "To be forewarned is to be forearmed." I generally do not place myself in situations where I am vulnerable without having some form of back-up.
You see, you have no clue of how prophetic a statement you made and you don't know what I do for a living, nor do I plan to tell you. Let me suffice to say that I am rarely without a back-up plan on anything in my life. Wisdom does indeed come with age...and I am hardly old, but I've been around the block, it seems, many more times than most liberals. And if you had walked in my shoes, you would know better than to accuse me of things about which you have absolutely zero understanding.
Bernie- I am not one to dog on people to make my point known, but I do agree with you about liberals. I know there are very respectable liberals out there just as there are those lacking in respect in the Republican Party. That being said, as a wife of one who was furloughed last week, you can't stoop any lower than to take a stab at Republicans on your letter declaring that hard working Americans will not be paid while Congress argues over a health bill that nobody wants. Each time the Republicans sent a proposal to the Senate it was DOA before it even hit the floor. All Reed had to say looking down at his podium, "they've lost there minds." Referring to the Republican Party. I hate to say it guys but you pretty much proved his point by coming back with nothing but rude distasteful comments. Next time take the high road and just talk like the intelligent people that you really are.
Bethany, I think the government shutdown is a travesty. I also think it's extraordinarily petty for Obambi and his minions to stoop to the level of blocking outdoor open air exhibits, like monuments and parks, just to inflict pain and suffering on the majority of Americans that they can. Our Republican House has proposed numerous options to re-fund the government and end this Obamanation called Obamacare. They are even willing to discuss raising the debt ceiling (for which I will never understand the necessity - after all, if you have reached the debt limit in your household, do apply for another credit card, or do you try to curb your overspending habits? Our liberal lawmakers just don't get it. And Obambi is taking the 'my way or the highway' approach.
I sincerely hope that the Republican wins in New Jersey this week. That would end up handing our president (again, note the small 'p') a well deserved can of whoop-a--. He is not willing to negotiate and is driving this country straight off a fiscal cliff. There is a reason our forefathers designed the system the way they did. America doesn't need a king. Congress provides the checks and balances to power and the American people who elected and re-elected Republicans to the House in 2010 and 2012 were sending King Obambi a message. He's a deer standing on the tracks of this Republic, but we're the train about to mow him down.
Coincidentally, if the Democrat does win in New Jersey, you can blame the deer-in-the-headlight liberals who don't pay attention. Cory Booker has more skeletons in his closet than Anthony 'Expose My' Weiner and Eliot 'Client #9' Spitzer combined. Why is it that liberals care more for the welfare state than they do for the quality of the people that run for public office? Elect a sleeze and get what you deserve. That's why Jersey is the second highest taxed state in the US, right behind New York. Both are run by liberal democrats whose rule is pretty much unchecked. And please don't bother reminding me that Chris Christie is a Republican. His conservative credentials are sorely lacking IMHO.
by Jack Lee59 minutes ago
It has been almost a year since he left office. Though he seems to stick around DC and make his comments occasionally about policies...The question I have for all is this - what is your opinion of this President in his...
by Jack Lee25 hours ago
Let's just cut to the chase. I have initiated a discussion here on hubpages forum regarding the media and conservatives but here is the bottom line.This is an appeal to all liberals and progressives...and...
by Credence23 years ago
I quote from a news source“Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney jumped into the debate over the GOP's future Tuesday night, warning congressional Republicans against forcing a government shutdown in...
by Dr Billy Kidd4 years ago
It's been a couple of days now. Fox News Reporter Andrea Tantaros said that if you see a person who voted for Obama, hit 'em in the face. Why is there no discussion of this? Is inciting to violence the new hate message...
by James Smith4 years ago
Modern conservatives claim that their ideology rests on these principles: individual liberty, small government, fiscal conservatism, a strong national defence and the rule of law. I'd just like to focus on the small...
by Credence23 years ago
Excellent op-ed page that discusses conservatism taking two distinct tracts. Have a read and share your opinion, please. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 … /?src=recg
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.