To the GOP: Is it about your Religion? Your Rights? Your Money?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by seabag

 

Well, the world has changed. It's evolved. We should keep up.

Ok - I'll bite.

How has the world evolved in the past 4 years? Serious question, I honestly don't see it and want to know.

reply to post by romney


I see Romney, after his loss decided to join ATS!!!


Bravo!!



I think Obama's reelection was one based on "we don't want Romney as President". Not based on his merits at what hes done the past 4 years. Now when it all goes to crap, who will Obama blame for the last 4 years?

Quite the question actually.

reply to post by Frogs


Thanks for "biting". The world hasn't evolved in 4 years. It's evolved over the last 50 years. Obama did not start the fires. He is doing his best to level the playing field, and if we are stuck with a global economy, we have to acknowledge that when there are people starving and dying and being bombed and left to die without medication, we all lose.

Still, in the last four years, my husband has been laid-off twice, endured over a year of unemployment, and now has a JOB. My daughter is just graduated and is an engineer in alternative fuel-cell research, and the funding for that endeavor (at a company that is as old as this country) is going to increase 3-fold. Those are good things.

reply to post by seabag

so·cial·ism [soh-shuh-liz-uh m] Show IPA
noun
1.
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

If we're going to use words, let's use them correctly. What we have now is not socialism, it's an:

ol·i·gar·chy [ol-i-gahr-kee] Show IPA
noun, plural ol·i·gar·chies.
1.
a form of government in which all power is vested in a few persons or in a dominant class or clique; government by the few.

Taxation ≠ socialism nor communism.
Social responsibility ≠ socialism or communism.
Governance by rule of law ≠ socialism, communism, nor totalitarianism.

These are absolutist smokescreens used to invoke the bogeyman into the minds of those raised during the cold war and are rhetorical and empty.

The days of "Mine, mine, mine" need to end. They had a 30 year run, they were fun, and they bankrupted this nation economically and morally. Greed, despite what Mr Gekko told us, is not good.

~Heff

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by romney

 

I see Romney, after his loss decided to join ATS!!!


Bravo!!

I think Obama's reelection was one based on "we don't want Romney as President". Not based on his merits at what hes done the past 4 years. Now when it all goes to crap, who will Obama blame for the last 4 years?

Quite the question actually.

It was based upon many things...

Obama was right in blaming Bush

If I shot you in the leg five years ago and your doctor couldn't get you to running again,
you gonna blame the doctor for it?

Even at this pace the job situation will be looking pretty damn good in two years.

Sometimes you pay the price and sometimes that price is years.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by Frogs

 

Thanks for "biting". The world hasn't evolved in 4 years. It's evolved over the last 50 years. Obama did not start the fires.

Cue Billy Joel...but you're spot on.

He is doing his best to level the playing field, and if we are stuck with a global economy, we have to acknowledge that when there are people starving and dying and being bombed and left to die without medication, we all lose.

I think the global economy is one of the GOP's biggest hangups. They simply can't accept the fact that the 1950's are over, and we have to join the rest of the world.

Wildtimes, Bravo!

They are all trying to figure out what went wrong, while to everyone else it seems obvious.

The republican party will become irrelevant unless they realize there is much, much more to being the President of the United States, and running this country, than just MONEY and DEBT. They can't seem to see past that.

Important, yes, but the be all /end all of the country's needs? No.
And it seems to me, btw, that when they try to address other issues, it comes across as feeble and fake.

People see through it.

Originally posted by romney


Obama was right in blaming Bush

Contradiction ?

reply to post by BellaSabre


Thanks. (To you and everyone who has contributed so far.)

I hope we might get some answers, and some serious and thoughtful dialogue, though I doubt we'll see much in that regard.

Guys, is it toxic to you? Is it "Greek" to you? What is it, exactly??

reply to post by HappyBunny

That's communism, but I'm not surprised that you don't know the difference.

The only real difference is that pure socialism is primarily a collectivist economic system while communism is both political and economic. Socialism almost always devolves into communism. Maybe it’s you who doesn’t see where this is heading….

If following the constitution, advocating for limited government, supporting the rights of the unborn, and fiscal responsibility are outdated 200 year old practices than YES…..I want to go back to THAT!!

Um, where in the Constitution does it support the "unborn" and call for fiscal responsibility?

Have you ever heard of ”LIFE , Liberty and the pursuit of happiness??

How about Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that gives the federal government its power of taxation. It clearly states:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

Wiki


It doesn’t say congress can spend tax dollars on any damn thing it wants.

reply to post by seabag

Socialism almost always devolves into communism.

Okay, but capitalism ALWAYS devolves into what we have now.
That's not "almost always". It's "always", because money makes people blind to the needy. Or, if I'm wrong, please explain in what way it doesn't, so I can understand.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by BellaSabre

 

Thanks. (To you and everyone who has contributed so far.)

I hope we might get some answers, and some serious and thoughtful dialogue, though I doubt we'll see much in that regard.

Guys, is it toxic to you? Is it "Greek" to you? What is it, exactly??

Why is it not considered thoughtful dialogue when the views expressed are in opposition to your own? 58 million "unevolved" people can ask the same questions of your stance. Is it toxic to you? Is it "Greek" to you? Why is it so difficult to accept that there are people in this country that have a different view?

reply to post by micmerci


I'm asking what the issue is, exactly, micmerci. What is it? Is it about your religion? Your rights? Your money?
What....
please, I'm asking, so that I can have a more compassionate point of view. I've stated my case. So far, I haven't seen much of an answer to those (that) question.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by seabag

 

Socialism almost always devolves into communism.

Okay, but capitalism ALWAYS devolves into what we have now.
That's not "almost always". It's "always", because money makes people blind to the needy. Or, if I'm wrong, please explain in what way it doesn't, so I can understand.

CRONY CAPITALISM is what we have now, and both parties drink from the same cup. Are you pretending not to notice the big corporate money in BOTH parties??

The people who were to protect us from capitalism-gone-wild have instead been bought.....the safe guard has failed and we now have CRONY capitalism. Are you suggesting democrats are going to fix this???

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

That's communism, but I'm not surprised that you don't know the difference.

The only real difference is that pure socialism is primarily a collectivist economic system while communism is both political and economic. Socialism almost always devolves into communism. Maybe it’s you who doesn’t see where this is heading….

It does? Got a few examples?

If following the constitution, advocating for limited government, supporting the rights of the unborn, and fiscal responsibility are outdated 200 year old practices than YES…..I want to go back to THAT!!

Um, where in the Constitution does it support the "unborn" and call for fiscal responsibility?

Have you ever heard of ”LIFE , Liberty and the pursuit of happiness??

If you really believed that, you'd have supported Obamacare enthusiastically. And that phrase is from the Declaration of Independence anyway, not the Constitution.

How about Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that gives the federal government its power of taxation. It clearly states:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

Wiki


It doesn’t say congress can spend tax dollars on any damn thing it wants.

You did see the phrase in there "provide for the general Welfare of the United States," didn't you?

As for paying off debt, they were heavily in debt to the French at the time and needed to pay that down as quickly as they could--France bankrupted itself supporting us, you know.

reply to post by wildtimes


Ahh - ok. Sorry, I thought you meant just in the past 4 years.

I agree with you in part. People have always starved and died and been killed without thought and left to die without medication all throughout history. I don't say that to be harsh or mean. I don't like it - but that has largely been the history of mankind. It is nothing new. Some of the ways it happens may be new. But it happening is not. People caring about it (or not ) is also not a new thing.

What has happened is (as you point out) the world has gotten smaller due to technology. When I started my job over a dozen years ago most everyone I work with was in the US with a few in Europe. Now they are scattered over the globe.

All of those things you mentioned are indeed good things. Look, I lean right and I'll tell you and be the first to agree with you that your husband getting a job, your daughter graduating and her work in alternative fuel cells getting funding from her employer are all good things. Heck - they are great things!! I honestly mean that.

I would be curious if you thought that I would not think they are good because I lean right?

This is just my two cents. I think both the left and the right want what is good for their families and their country. In some cases there is a different view of what is "good". In others the view is the same just different ways of getting there. Lastly, we are just often mis-informed about the other side and told they are full of various scoundrels and idiots and some people come to believe that and act accordingly.

On "leveling the playing field" - think globally. Someone that is very poor here may still be vastly better off than someone who is very poor in say Kenya. A different standard of living between the two countries is the reason.

Now, say I have a company. The guy in the US will do the work for $5. The guy in Kenya will do the work for $1. The US will make me pay a ton of taxes, Kenya may be so happy I'm hiring some people that they let me in tax free and with little regulation. So, I pick up my shop and move it to Kenya.

Be it Obama, Romney, Fred Flintstone or whoever we put in that chair in the Oval Office they have a very limited amount of stuff they can do keep me from moving my company to Kenya if I want to. What they do and how they do it is the crux of some of the left / right differences.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by micmerci

 

I'm asking what the issue is, exactly, micmerci. What is it? Is it about your religion? Your rights? Your money?
What....
please, I'm asking, so that I can have a more compassionate point of view. I've stated my case. So far, I haven't seen much of an answer to those (that) question.

If you are sincerely asking as stated in your OP as to why the Republicans are so mad- the answer is simple- they are a bunch of sore-loser, whiny babies. They lost- move on! Prepare for the future of your party. But as I stated in another thread- IMO they should continue to stand on the Republican platform while working on their image.

There are those out there that will argue that the Repub platform is outdated and that of angry old white fat cats. But I don't think 58 million people fit that description.

reply to post by Frogs


Thanks! I appreciate your input.
I think hiring someone in Kenya is great, as long as it's not taking a job away from an American. It's all about the numbers, and that's what bugs me.

Yes, even the poorest here are better of than some in developing countries. They get a job, and things improve. No argument with that. Still, doing so (moving the job to Kenya) creates the very problem that is the root of today's angst: an American with no job, who then needs help. See what I mean?

Until our own house is in order, we ought to be working on our own house. In my opinion.
And just for the record, I'm a registered voter and "Unaffiliated".

reply to post by seabag


No, I'm not pretending. I am an Unaffiliated voter, and I realize that the entire two-party system is a machine of its own. In the OP I addressed lobbyists, corporate buying of congressmen, etc.

I voted for my morals, my values, despite the odds. And I'm glad to see that the Republican party is now aware it needs an overhaul. I don't despise them, I just can't support what I don't think is ethical.

I wonder if America REALLY is as dumb as we act? It's like the majority of "republicans" have never discovered a dictionary and the word "socialism" is the devil and he's commin to get us all! I live in the bible-belt so I have to say this just about every day but we aren't socialist, not even close. I know many republicans have secret wet dreams of a future socialist America but it just ain't gonna happen, get over it.

I know I'll get a lot of heat for saying that but I really don't care. I'm comfortable with where I sit as far as politics is concerned. I just get sick of hearing socialist socialist socialist socialist socialist socialist socialist socialist...
It's like that's the only word you guys even know. Are you truly that paranoid of your own lack of education?

I agree with some of the things in the OP. We do need to move on toward a less hateful society, that's certainly very true. I think Obama's problem is that he is nowhere near progressive enough and he should be a lot more dominant and demanding as a leader. That being said, he has done some things that really hit me hard, like support crap like sopa, pipa, NDAA ( Great job Georgie wannabe! ). BUT, it could be much worse.

Personally, as an Independent, I did what I'll pretty much always do, I voted for a third party candidate. If it would have been Ron Paul rather than Mitt, I probably would have voted Republican this time around, but it wasn't so I didn't. I didn't agree with Gary at all on his tax stance, but I can look at it from more than one position and be responsible enough to compromise and make decisions that seem to be the best in a situation.

I'm not socially conservative at all, as a matter of fact I am very socially liberal but I can certainly be fiscally conservative when it's needed. I will never be pro big business and corporation because I do not believe in screwing my fellow citizens. I am very pro small business and I believe corporations crush regular people's chances. I would tax the hell out of corporations and put in place laws that would make it beyond pointless for an American citizen to start or relocate a business in another nation because if you want to start a business you can do it in your own country. The way I see it is that if you don't think it's good enough to run a business somewhere and you really want to form one then you're free to leave.

As an agnostic who believes that everyone should have a right to believe what they want to as long as they aren't harming others, I strongly support a true separation of church and state. Religion does not belong in modern politics and it needs to get out now!

I firmly stand by men like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson in believing that America needs to worry more about America and less about everyone else. We need to keep our noses clean, as it currently stands, we're in so deep that I can't make the smell go away.

The government shouldn't be able to tell people who they can or can't marry, things like that should be left to the individual to decide for themselves. Stay out of our bedrooms!

As I've said numerous times, I am an independent. But some of you right wing people really scare me. Most of you are far too old to have to fight in a war but I truly believe that you would gladly have my peers dying for causes they do not believe in if you could have it your way. If hell exists, I'm pretty sure there's a special place in it for people like that...