Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why I hate the republican party.

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
In regards to Obama vs. Bush, Obama has taken the abuses of George W Bush and driven them further and is now in the process of codifying them. The Patriot Act under Bush created massive abuse of Executive power. Obama, who ran against these abuses, has not reversed them. His DHS has driven the TSA to become a 4th amendment destroying, abusive agency it is. It was created by Bush, taken to its extreme by Obama. The signing of the latest NDAA proves Obama's antipathy to freedom or welfare of American individuals.
Obama has driven the use of domestic drones. He clearly does not support civil liberties and has taken the door cracked by Bush and flung it wide open. Its funny to watch liberals defend his murder of an American citizen without trial or investigation of any kind. If Bush, did that, they'd be frothing at the mouth. Now, the DHS official policy is that anyone who vocally supports the Constitution is considered a potential domestic terrorist. This happened under Obama and it is getting more intense.
As to foreign policy, I don't see any real divergence from Bush. Economic hitmen and Corporate/banking interests are given support at the expense of American interests. He followed Bush's exact timeline in Iraq and he supports the same corporate crony leadership in Afghanistan. He supported a phony war in Libya so the Banking interests could secure Ghadafi's gold, huge assets, and oil to bolster their failing socialist, debt laden economies (because the banks own the Western world). Now he is sending "advisers" to Africa to fight against "injustice". Right smack where a poop ton of oil was recently discovered. Sound familiar?
So, if based on Presidential performance, I'd say they both suck, but Obama's actions to help his corrupt, failing allies(same allies Bush had) are far more catastrophic to the US than anything Bush did. Which is saying quite a lot.
If based on party performance and Democrats are supposed to be the people's party, all they have done in the last 40 years is help ensure, directly, that an international, corporate/banking super elite has fully consolidated power on the planet. Why are we trusting them any more than the Republicans again?
edit on 19-3-2012 by pierregustavetoutant because: add




posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Both of the major parties in America are #ed. Not just Repubs.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 


Dubya is the one that created this economic crisis to begin with. By failure to bolster the economy after 9/11, and failure to provide aid during Katrina. If he had acted more intelligently in both cases the country would be in a better place right now. He was given the reigns to a strong country, and ran it into the ground. Not unlike other little rich kids that are given the world by their parents and still can't seem to make a life for themselves.

If republican economic ideals weren't so completely full of crap we wouldn't be in this situation right now. Dubya failed.
edit on 19-3-2012 by Evolutionsend because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaughingatHumanity
reply to post by Evolutionsend
 


Then you are nothing more than what is desired of the citizenry. Instead of seeing that it's two wings of the same bird you are going to bemoan and attack a single side. This polarity of opinion and action is why we as a nation are nothing more than chattel.



Do you think the wealthy actually scatter their money among all politicians or would you imagine they side with a particular party? If you are invested in oil or are a billionaire you are probably supporting republicans. Democrats have corrupt politicians as well but they are not organized to fight alongside Walmart and against the unions. If your party - simply so they may continue to extract and burn fossil fuels & get people to stop thinking about GREEN ENERGY - stoop so low as to concoct a plan to muddy the global warming science - that's pure evil. Do you compare fighting environmentalist who hope to save the land, endangered species, and clean water to fighting for the right to get a gun without a background check and carry them in public places? Is fighting to protect a woman's privacy concerning her body the same as caving in to fracking and opening up more lands for drilling? Republicans are fighting against education and health care. They support tax breaks for the rich and off shore accounts (businesses incentives) so same "business" will return to America from the (often) Communist country they produce in now to legally (US laws) use slave labor. They support aggression and war and squander American lives, while the other party pushes for diplomacy and less violent negotiation to conserve American lives.
One party is more disorganized and spread out because it has less moneyed supporters to rally around. The Democrats represent lower income and middle class individuals and workers. It speaks in defense of the poor, the destitute, the unemployed and the under privileged.
Republicans supports and represents Capitalism - Corporations - War (they even want to give Corporations person-hood) fetal tissue (also trying to give it personhood, ignoring women's privacy rights) Republicans support the upper middle-class and the privileged along with the uber-rich the Catholic Church and it's operations, transgressions and all (in some circles these transgressions would be criminal activity) It doesn't surprise me. Not saying Democrats are not Catholics but they are more open to and supportive of the freedoms of other religions besides just the Christians and the Jews and the pedophiles at the Church, which the vast majority of Republicans bow down to and represent.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
FWIW the Republicans of the sixties were more liberal than the Democrats of today. They by and large fully supported social programs for the poor, of course there were far fewer poor and they had far less hand in making them so ie; there are few democratic CEO's on Wall St.
Anymore the way I see it is one coin with two faces. The coin is always in play but presents a different face once in a while to give the illusion of choice. In reality we truly have only one choice, reject the entire system. And this does not mean getting RP in office as he would be a ineffectual president at war with trillion dollar special interests in congress to see he is a one term or less president. This juggernaut will only stop with it's destruction. We choose between "responsibility" and "compassion" it seems this time as the real agenda of the American Empire is realized by all who run the game.
IMO it is now up to the military to decide if expensive toys are worth the end of a country or if they are warriors of an empire. We already know who our politicians really answer to, right? We know the ones they answer to all are on the same side, right? All we do not know is of the military has become as beholden to those interests. If so Zig Heil, eh? if not there is still a small window for change.But only if the frail oath sworn to an old hemp rag still carries enough believers.
Specifically to the OP. I do not "hate" republicans, but I do strongly disagree with the latest diversion from the debate at hand by using a social wedge issue as distraction. It is not only poorly chosen, it is antithetical to the "small government" they all talk about.
The poster who noted that Obama has continued the dangerous policies enacted by Bush post 9/11 and expanded them is pointing out the lack of real policy difference. He is allowing new intrusions against the constitution,He has caved to the corporate "person" at the expense of humans. This is a zero sum election, any choice is no real choice.
I have become a political atheist. In politics there is no good,no god(of any faith but Mammon)and no saviors.I just do not believe in "the system" any longer and am putting my belief in my neighbors and friends and staying tight with them, from Indian sikh to redneck loggers we all agree on who the real enemy to our security is.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Evolutionsend
 

Well, you just lost all your credibility in the attempt to be unbiased. Dubya obviously failed. So did the republican Congress under him and so did the Democrat Congress under him. Obama has taken those failures and launched them on steroids. The Congress under both parties under him helped with it, but Obama is the President now and he has taken the Republican bet and quadrupled down on it. Dubya failed. Obama is actively destroying the nation. Obummer has seen Dubya's 5 and raised him 1500.

Dubya just excelerated the Clinton policies before him. Economic hitmen, jackals, and military action. he just didnt get the big present of terrorists killing 3000 Americans to let him totally loose. As far as economy goes, Clinton had zero to do with a technology boom and the internet tech bubble whose bust he conveniently missed out on (which had nothing to do with him, Bush, or esp. Al Gore). As far as domestic destruction of liberty, Clinton was no slouch. Ask Randy Weaver, the Branch Davidians, or any legal gun owner.
Time to open your eyes.
edit on 20-3-2012 by pierregustavetoutant because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-3-2012 by pierregustavetoutant because: spelling



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 





Now, the DHS official policy is that anyone who vocally supports the Constitution is considered a potential domestic terrorist. This happened under Obama and it is getting more intense.


pierregustavetoutant your above statement Is true and it should make every one suspicious of this Administration,,,,, Why?
Because as we Squabble among each other about Democrats and Republicans actions as of late.
Obama is getting away with
and we are letting him,,,,,,, Open Your Eyes Sheeple!





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join