Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Indigo5

The GOP OWNS their extreme right position...They campaign on it...no confusion there.

No, I'M extreme right. the GOP has been infiltrated and taken over by neocons, who are undercover left-wingers. That's how they earned the name RINO to begin with.

RINOs are largely defined on social issues...not anti-gay or anti-abortion enough...

I have never seen a GOP rep. declared a RINO for being pro-war, just the opposite.

Neo-cons believe in spreading "democracey" by any way possible..wars..and are defense hawks.

'left wingers" are traditionally anti-war.

Not sure how to make sense of your statement in that context?

How old are you? I'm over 50, and have NEVER known an anti-war left winger in my entire life. As a matter of fact, that very proclivity is one of the tell-tales that identifies neocons as "left wingers". It's not that the left is "anti-war", it's that they just want to fight different wars.

Name a war before GHW Bush's war, that was initiated by an alleged "right winger". Go ahead, find one. I'll wait. GHW Bush is - probably not coincidentally - the prototype neocon. A "left winger" in right-winger's clothing.

Your definition of what constitutes a "RINO" is probably part of my problem. You see, I'm old enough to recall how things were arranged before this current upheaval of definitions and switching of color schemes that appears to have been designed to confuse the populace, and appears to be working. When I was younger, the "left" was socially and fiscally "liberal" or further, and were represented by "red". Now, it's all been turned upside down, as suits the fancy of the speaker. The major change occurred around 2000, but there were signs it was on it's way for perhaps 10 years prior.

I declared then, and I declare NOW, the both GHW Bush and GW Bush were RINOs, based mostly on their pro-war stance, and secondarily on their anti-freedom stances. neither was either socially OR fiscally conservative, either. A "Conservative", by definition, seeks to conserve, not squander, reallocate, or impose. A stance against gay marriage or abortion is not "conservative", since it seeks to impose new and unusual rules. Those are liberal positions, because they seek to impose the tyranny of the majority on the minority. They are positions requiring the exercise of "democracy". Democracy is not a default conservative position, it is a default liberal position. You are correct that neocons are intent on "spreading democracy", because they are NOT conservatives.

Neocons ARE liberals, they ARE RINOs, they are liberals trying to masquerade as conservatives to draw the rank and file to the left, following their leaders in true democratic fashion.

Neocons are also the reason I left the GOP several years ago, and will never return to it.

IT'S THE JEWSSSS, IT'S THE JEWSSSS, OH NONO I MEAN IT THE NASTY REPUBLICANS....../S

To the OP. As a proud Libertarian I agree with the others that there is little difference between the majority parties. They're all in bed with same special interests groups and part of one big club that could care less about the people.

That said, the far-right Republicans are no more the problem then the far-left Democrats. Your view that the Republicans are blocking "progress" is exactly correct - and exactly what many of us want! Personally, I'm glad that the Right is beginning to show some backbone and oppose everything that Obama and the so-called Progressives are trying to push through.

Twenty years ago I was a card-holding Democrat and eventually left and started voting Libertarian when I saw the obvious hypocrisy of their words and actions (Mind you, I was never a Republican). However, for the first time in my life, I'm seriously considering voting for a Republican (Romney - who I don't like at all). At this point, I'd vote for a house plant if meant getting rid of Obama.

reply to post by wills120


here here!

Blocking "progress" is about the only thing the GOP IS doing right - even if they are doing it for the wrong reasons.

I can't go as far as you, and consider voting for Romney, because he is nothing more than Obama Light, but I share the sentiment of voting for a house plant over the current major party choices. I have just about come to the conclusion that I will wait until closer to the election, then examine campaign funding, and vote for whoever can run their campaign with the least amount of external money - on the theory that if they can campaign on a shoe string, they might be able to do other wondrous financial things as well, and there will be less corporate money, and influence, in their run.

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by wills120

 

here here!

Blocking "progress" is about the only thing the GOP IS doing right - even if they are doing it for the wrong reasons.

That attitude says it all. You are not alone in your beliefs, but misguided.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by wills120

 

here here!

Blocking "progress" is about the only thing the GOP IS doing right - even if they are doing it for the wrong reasons.

That attitude says it all. You are not alone in your beliefs, but misguided.

Care to expand? "Misguided" in what way? You are perhaps thinking more laws, rules, regulations and general government interference will make everything all beautiful again?

You do understand that you can't fall off of a cliff without making "progress" to the edge of said cliff, right?

"Progress" simply for the sake of progress is not always a good thing - it depends entirely on what you are progressing towards...

Originally posted by nenothtu

Care to expand? "Misguided" in what way? You are perhaps thinking more laws, rules, regulations and general government interference will make everything all beautiful again?

No. Your assumptions are getting in the way.

Originally posted by nenothtu

You do understand that you can't fall off of a cliff without making "progress" to the edge of said cliff, right?

"Progress" simply for the sake of progress is not always a good thing - it depends entirely on what you are progressing towards...

The "Progress" that at one time made us the most innovative country on the planet. The "Progress" that gave women and minorities the right to vote.

You are stuck in the "big government" view of progress. Small governments can be progressive too and they don't need to tell gay people they can't marry, or teen-age girls that they need to have a baby.

A government should be no larger than it needs to be.

reply to post by Indigo5


Who's stuck in the "big Government" view of progress? The Democrats? The Republicans? BOTH!

There's that irony/hypocrisy that caused me to loose faith in the Democratic party (I never had it for the Republican party)...their definition of progress is not mine nor is it associated with the spirit of The Constitution. Misguided as I appear to you, I'm happy that someone is at least standing in the way of their (Dems) vision of "progress"

Originally posted by Indigo5

The "Progress" that at one time made us the most innovative country on the planet. The "Progress" that gave women and minorities the right to vote.

My mistake, I thought this thread was focused on politics, but that sort of progress was not politically acquired.

You are stuck in the "big government" view of progress. Small governments can be progressive too and they don't need to tell gay people they can't marry, or teen-age girls that they need to have a baby.

I don't care who gets married or has babies - that's their business, not mine. When they ask for government sanction for either, they also open the door for government censure. That applies on both cases - if the gays insist on government approval of their relationships, they should likewise be thoroughly prepared for governmental refusal instead, and if a teenage girl wants to kill off her little inconveniences, that's none of my business, Personally, I told my kids what causes that, and they acted accordingly. If others don't, well hell, just cut the baby's throat and be done with it! Who needs inconvenience when there's fun to be had, right? I mean, being responsible for the results of your own actions is SO last century!

A government should be no larger than it needs to be.

That's an odd argument coming from one who thinks that obstructionism of the government from passing yet MORE intrusions into our life is the way to go... how does that shrink government, exactly?

reply to post by Procession101


And I agree with you. However, I feel like I'm doing both (maybe hypocritical of me?) I will be voting for Ron Paul, after swearing I'd never vote again. But he's not really a republican. At least in the current popular definition.

As far as taking on TPTB, I'm still trying to identify who they actually are. I want to gather all the info I can on these global mobsters before storming NATO or the Bilderbergs with a pitchfork. Also trying to convince friends and family that there is a real problem. I need backup.

Until the time is right (whatever that means) I fight all the small battles I can. Protesting, local ma and pa consumerism, bicycling, informing others, just avoiding the system as much as possible.

I would still like to think this can be turned around with pens and not swords. Meanwhile, I keep my sword sharp and practice often.

Originally posted by nenothtu

That's an odd argument coming from one who thinks that obstructionism of the government from passing yet MORE intrusions into our life is the way to go... how does that shrink government, exactly?

You seem unaware of the nature of the obstructionism. It is to preserve Republicans version of Big Government, tax carve outs and subsidies for Oil, Wall Street, corporations, the wealthy...

The tax code is almost 3000 pages thick with special breaks and the GOP are fighting to preserve it.

But go ahead and keep cheering them on in the name of smaller government.

As far as gay marriage...sure...go ahead and recind all government recognitiobn of straight couples...I am good with that, but as long as the government affords married couples special status, inheritance, tax breaks...legal status... then married couples should include gays and the rights should be equal.

Don't want government sponsored campaigns for nutrition programs and healthy eating...Great!...Stop subsidizing corn syrup and monsanto additives.

Small government can be achieved...the GOP are not Obstructing "big Government"...they are preserving the Big Government they have created.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by nenothtu

That's an odd argument coming from one who thinks that obstructionism of the government from passing yet MORE intrusions into our life is the way to go... how does that shrink government, exactly?

You seem unaware of the nature of the obstructionism. It is to preserve Republicans version of Big Government, tax carve outs and subsidies for Oil, Wall Street, corporations, the wealthy...

The tax code is almost 3000 pages thick with special breaks and the GOP are fighting to preserve it.

But go ahead and keep cheering them on in the name of smaller government.

As far as gay marriage...sure...go ahead and recind all government recognitiobn of straight couples...I am good with that, but as long as the government affords married couples special status, inheritance, tax breaks...legal status... then married couples should include gays and all americans.

Don't want government sponsored campaigns for nutrition programs and healthy eating...Great!...Stop subsidizing corn syrup and monsanto additives.

Small government can be achieved...the GOP are not Obstructing "big Government"...they are preserving the Big Government they have created.

Everything you listed there the Democrats could vote "NO" on, but don't. Obama could veto any of those bills that come across his desk, but doesn't. The whole of congress, including Democrats, could stop him from bombing the crap out of the citizens of sovereign nations, but cheer him on. The Democrats have not passed a budget in 3 years, and there's no sign they're about to. Care to explain again how "Republicans are the problem"?

I can't wait for your dodge on this one, just as you've dodged every other direct question to you.

/TOA

reply to post by Chi-and-Me


Seems like we are fighting the same fight then brother.
The best and safest thing we can do is just educate people in the situation.
Whether they are willing to accept what we are teaching is up to them, hopefully more people will open their eyes!!

reply to post by Indigo5



This is what I call a program trigger. Claim one side is to blame even saying the other side makes mistakes too but the majority of blame goes to the other side and it triggers all the programming people have been fed that one party is better then the other that one party is looking out for them while the other is out to destroy them etc. etc. etc.

Hear all those programs running? People jumping on the thread arguing one side or the other... These kinds of triggers are all over the news they have made idiots like Hannity and Limbaugh millions. They are used in your local and state politics too, Think about it every time you hear "the Republicans did this" or "the democrats did that" suddenly you have this urge to defend your favored party... That's your programming kicking in. We all have it I still get the urge but I have deleted the program so I get a "file not found" message.

Delete the program folks THEY ARE ONE BIG PARTY and playing all of us like a fiddle and laughing all the way to the bank. This crap just keeps us distracted. Live and let live stop thinking you have a right to anyone elses money or can tell them what to do. As long as they are not harming you leave them alone. Stop bringing government force to bear to get what you want. Stop acting like a gang and voting in laws that benefit you at the expense of others. Stop thinking taxing is ok. It is theft pure and simple. If one takes your money against your will that is theft stop letting them program you to think because they call it a tax instead of what it is "theft" and the gang voted on it it is anything other then theft.

Stop being selfish no harm no crime live and let live!

Let's just say it..

Anyone who still believes that there is actually a difference between "republicans" and "democrats" is the problem.

The problem is that it is legal for Corporations to spend money on candidates and donate. The problem is that most of the government are also employed by one or more of the GIANT industries be it Oil, Banking, Agriculture, and so on.

That is the problem.

reply to post by Indigo5

Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

If by problem you mean inhibiting liberal ideology from taking over the country, then yes.

Yes, republicans are the problem.

beez

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

If by problem you mean inhibiting liberal ideology from taking over the country, then yes.

So much confusion...Both "liberal" and "conservative" ideology exist in this nation to varying degrees. A spectrum of views across "the people". Niether idealogy in it's extreme form is good for the country.

Our government was designed for debate, discussion and yes compromise after the the razor of discourse has dismissed ideas that have little logic or benefit.

In the ideal scenario true "Fiscal" conservatives eliminate wasteful spending and push back against future waste, while Liberal Democrats push for social equality, healthcare and safety nets for the poorest struggling Americans and compromise is found.

What we have is a GOP that refuses to even debate. Refuses to relent on tax breaks for the wealthiest...no discourse, no discussion, gridlock like we have never known.

One party (Democrats) might be well in need of fiscal restraint, but the other party (GOP) is simply refusing to compromise while pushing forward BIGGER government in the form of special rules, regulations and tax breaks for the wealthy, plus a legislated social agenda.

Fiscal restraint...restraint from bigger intrusions into our lives (Gay marriage, reproductive rights) etc...whatever you wish for is not an option for a government where one party REFUSES to even debate legislation. Absent discourse our representitives do not represent us....THAT is why the GOP...while not all of the problem...are without a doubt the ROOT of the problem. If you don't think so, imagine the Democrats taking a majority in Novemeber and behaving the exact same way. THAT is not the government our founders intended.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

If by problem you mean inhibiting liberal ideology from taking over the country, then yes.

Yes, republicans are the problem.

beez

See post above...If the GOP continue on thier obstructionist course, they risk thier majority...and if we end up with a Democrat majority behaving the same way post November we will be in an equally bad place.

The moderate middle is where good government originates, through honest debate. If the GOP fails to understand this we risk a nation of extremes which is what our founders looked to protect against when they concieved our system.

The GOP will not hold thier majority in November unless they start to actually debate...in congress...not Fox News.

Originally posted by Indigo5

You seem unaware of the nature of the obstructionism. It is to preserve Republicans version of Big Government, tax carve outs and subsidies for Oil, Wall Street, corporations, the wealthy...

we'll get nowhere pretty quick with that - you're focusing on your gripes, I'm focusing on mine. when did the loyal opposition propose an end to subsidies that the GOP obstructed? I'm all for it if they did - subsidies for private business are not the purview of public government - if they can't run their business in the black, let 'em fall hard.

The tax code is almost 3000 pages thick with special breaks and the GOP are fighting to preserve it.

I'm all for lower taxes, too - let the government learn to live withing their means. The tax code could be simplified considerably, but neither side wants to do it. It could be boiled down to a single sentence - "how much money did you make? Give us 10 % of that." no excuses, shelters, loopholes, or breaks, no "graduated scale", same rate for rich or poor. THAT would be equality under the law - not what we have now.

As far as gay marriage...sure...go ahead and recind all government recognitiobn of straight couples...I am good with that, but as long as the government affords married couples special status, inheritance, tax breaks...legal status... then married couples should include gays and the rights should be equal.

I'm all for it. Government has no business in marriage at all, neither "permitting it", nor extending any special considerations for it, regardless of who is marrying.

Don't want government sponsored campaigns for nutrition programs and healthy eating...Great!...Stop subsidizing corn syrup and monsanto additives.

Sound like a winner to me - get rid of all that mess, and the government agencies that regulate/oversee such.

Small government can be achieved...the GOP are not Obstructing "big Government"...they are preserving the Big Government they have created.

edit on 21-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

That's my whole point - neither the GOP nor the DNC are going to shrink government. There's really not much difference between them at all, other than which cronies benefit from their largesse. In some of the more entertaining cases, it's the SAME cronies, even!