Colin Powell: The GOP’s Afraid of Rush
Politics • Views: 2,364
Colin Powell says GOP leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh.
578 comments
2 |
yochanan Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:06:27pm |
powell isn't a republican anymore so frankly if i want democrat opinion i will ask a long term one,.
| 4 |
LGoPs Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:07:21pm |
After endorsing Obama, the good General can keep his advice to conservatives/Republicans to himself.
| 5 |
freetoken Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:07:28pm |
Somedays it seems the GOP leaders are afraid of their own shadow, not to mention any given demagogue.
| 6 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:07:28pm |
re: #2 yochanan
powell isn't a republican anymore so frankly if i want democrat opinion i will ask a long term one,.
so what, he is making a valid point
| 9 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:08:22pm |
Just venturing a guess, but I don't think the GOP or Rush really cares what Powell thinks anymore.
| 11 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:08:26pm |
| 12 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:08:27pm |
How many millions does Rush reach everyday? You can't ignore him as much as some would like to.
| 13 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:09:04pm |
| 14 |
LGoPs Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:09:40pm |
| 16 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:10:12pm |
Colin stated, "numerous examples". Cite a few, Colin.
/crickets
| 18 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:10:52pm |
If they're afraid of him, how come they don't listen to him anymore? If they had, they would have won the last election.
| 19 |
itellu3times Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:11:04pm |
re: #15 Dad O' Blondes
Colin who?
.
That Irishman who likes to see things his own way, Colin O'Scopy.
| 20 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:11:51pm |
Rush has a service that checks his program for accuracy. He has been increasing his score above 91% for some time. Who else does that, much less claim any high accuracy?
| 21 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:12:09pm |
| 22 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:12:55pm |
re: #20 NelsFree
IIRC...that is a little parody right there.
| 23 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:12:56pm |
re: #18 Banner
If they're afraid of him, how come they don't listen to him anymore? If they had, they would have won the last election.
didn't have the numbers
| 24 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:13:26pm |
So, what has Colin done for America lately? What are Larry King's ratings?
| 25 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:13:27pm |
re: #7 Killgore Trout
He's right.
I agree, he is right. But it's not so much that they're afraid of Limbaugh -- they're afraid of the emails and phone calls they get from his army of dittohead followers.
| 26 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:14:17pm |
re: #25 Charles
I agree, he is right. But it's not so much that they're afraid of Limbaugh -- they're afraid of the emails and phone calls they get from Rush's army of followers.
it's not the numbers it's the numbing influence
| 27 |
VegasRick Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:14:26pm |
| 28 |
cnite Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:14:34pm |
I would comment, but I waiting for my orders from Rush.
| 29 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:14:44pm |
We're supposed to be the party that doesn't walk in lock-step, the party that has a tent large enough for disagreement. I guess those days are over.
| 30 |
Ward Cleaver Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:05pm |
re: #25 Charles
I agree, he is right. But it's not so much that they're afraid of Limbaugh -- they're afraid of the emails and phone calls they get from Rush's army of followers.
And the nirthers, and the Paulians. God help us.
| 31 |
Cathypop Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:32pm |
re: #29 Sharmuta
We're supposed to be the party that doesn't walk in lock-step, the party that has a tent large enough for disagreement. I guess those days are over.
Very well put.
| 32 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:35pm |
re: #25 Charles
I agree...we need a GOP that can move more forcefully and decisively against talk show hosts and their listeners than we do an 0bama presidency or congress that's trying to foist cap & trade, card check, 0bamacare and another stimulus while they think nobody's looking.
/
| 33 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:37pm |
re: #22 pingjockey
IIRC...that is a little parody right there.
Parody. Is that a tropical bird that can be trained to say whatever you want it to say? Wait, I just described Sonia Sotomayor.
/h
| 34 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:37pm |
re: #25 Charles
That's it right there. Hordes of rabid followers. Hey, I like Rush, but the man doesn't set my politcal agenda. He has some...far out ideas IMO.
| 35 |
Korla Pundit Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:15:58pm |
They should be afraid of Rush, along with ALL of their constituents. That's what creates liberty.
They want Rush and everybody else to fear THEM. That is called tyranny.
And who cares what the big Obama supporter thinks about what conservatives should or shouldn't do? He's had his moment, and he voted with his skin.
| 36 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:16:17pm |
re: #9 SasquatchOnSteroids
Just venturing a guess, but I don't think the GOP or Rush really cares what Powell thinks anymore.
...and that's why we'll have 8 years of Obama. Maybe even another Democrat after that.
| 38 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:16:33pm |
Why wouldn't politicians fear being in Limbaugh's sights? They probably should be. And if they are, what is wrong with that? Being held to account is a bad thing? If you have a position contrary to Limbaugh defend it.
Those who are cowed by the NY Times crew are different just how? Gutless also.
If you are an elected official, stand up. If you are gutless, go get yourself defeated.
| 39 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:16:36pm |
re: #24 NelsFree
So, what has Colin done for America lately? What are Larry King's ratings?
You have got to be kidding me. Say what you will about his endorsement of Obama, but Colin Powell's distinguished military service demonstrates that he has done quite enough "for America" without having to be asked to do more.
| 40 |
JarHeadLifer Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:04pm |
When Powell passes on one of the most moderate, centrist Republicans since Jerry Ford to vote for the most liberal presidential aspirant since, well forever, he's stopped being a "Republican" regardless of how he chooses to describe himself.
| 41 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:04pm |
| 42 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:08pm |
Rush has a large voice, but no responsibility to make anything happen.
| 43 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:16pm |
re: #17 albusteve
I enjoy Rush - most of the time, certainly not all the time. I'm distressed by the Oreo comment, I'm not thrilled with his stance on evolution. He does, however, make a lot of sense on topics related to fiscal conservatism, and has much the same thought as I do regarding many (not all) social issues. If the Republicans DID listen to this part of Rush, weeding out the chafe - which isn't rocket science work - our party would be doing better.
In an ideal world, we would be able to take some of Rush, some of Newt (eye of newt?), some of Mitt, a lot of Fred Thompson and come up with a viable candidate.
| 44 |
LGoPs Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:23pm |
Powell lost me when he endorsed Obama. I can't reconcile the decision process he must have gone through:
"I'm a Republican and I have a choice between a bona fide war hero and the most radical leftist in the entire fucking United States Congress. Hmmm, I just can't decide...hmmm. Well I guess I'll just toss a coin and...the commie wins"
/
| 45 |
freetoken Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:34pm |
re: #35 Korla Pundit
He's had his moment, and he voted with his skin.
Gahhh...
Why not just accept that Powell voted with his conscious, just as most voters do?
| 46 |
Cathypop Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:17:38pm |
re: #38 The Shadow Do
Why wouldn't politicians fear being in Limbaugh's sights? They probably should be. And if they are, what is wrong with that? Being held to account is a bad thing? If you have a position contrary to Limbaugh defend it.
Those who are cowed by the NY Times crew are different just how? Gutless also.
If you are an elected official, stand up. If you are gutless, go get yourself defeated.
The GOP has no balls.
| 47 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:18:00pm |
re: #36 Killgore Trout
...and that's why we'll have 8 years of Obama. Maybe even another Democrat after that.
whoa...that's deep into the realm of the unknown...in other words don't SAY THAT!
| 48 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:19:02pm |
re: #38 The Shadow Do
Why wouldn't politicians fear being in Limbaugh's sights? They probably should be. And if they are, what is wrong with that? Being held to account is a bad thing?
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
| 50 |
Render Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:19:24pm |
Does General Colin Powell (ret) have any comment about US troops in Afghanistan not getting their mail?
Will he have any comment when US troops in Afghanistan run out of fuel?
NOT
HIS
DOCTRINE,
R
| 51 |
Sheepdogess Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:19:55pm |
Actually, it's the Obama left that is terrified of Rush.
Powell is a member of the leftover left, and no longer relevant, and that is why is he allows himself to be interviewed by Larry King.
Pathetic.
| 52 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:20:05pm |
re: #45 freetoken
The fact that he voted for 0bama undermines whatever credibility he has.
| 53 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:20:25pm |
re: #34 pingjockey
That's it right there. Hordes of rabid followers.
Please justify your statement with examples.
Hey, I like Rush, but the man doesn't set my politcal agenda. He has some...far out ideas IMO.
Please cite an example of a 'far out idea' held by Rush.
tick tick tick tick Updoppler, turning towards
| 54 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:20:31pm |
re: #38 The Shadow Do
Why wouldn't politicians fear being in Limbaugh's sights? They probably should be. And if they are, what is wrong with that? Being held to account is a bad thing? If you have a position contrary to Limbaugh defend it.
That's just it- they do have contrary opinions and then they're bullied into shutting up. It's conditioning- after a couple of tries, they just stop. That's bad for this country. We need healthy debate- not stifled debate.
| 55 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:20:36pm |
re: #35 Korla Pundit
He's had his moment, and he voted with his skin.
And you know that ... how? Please note that Powell himself has specifically denied this allegation.
| 56 |
Cathypop Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:20:55pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
Why are you so cheery tonight? Did you get your unicorn?///
| 57 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:21:15pm |
I just had to drive out to the airport with a bag of sandwiches for my son and his wife, who were stranded after missing a connecting flight. There wasn't time for them to leave the airport and come here for a normal meal and they were STARVING. I know what it's like to be stuck at an airport.
There should be kosher food concessions at all airports. I'm surprised there aren't any at JFK and La Guardia, only at Ben-Gurion.
| 58 |
dapperdave Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:21:49pm |
Limbaugh has principles and is steadfast in his beliefs, Colin Powell does not, he's just another lame RINO.
| 59 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:22:37pm |
re: #53 NelsFree
Creationism dammit! Not science. Wish I had a couple others of the top of my head and don't. Like I said I like Rush, but some of his stances on certain things just go the wrong way with me.
| 60 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:22:40pm |
re: #29 Sharmuta
We're supposed to be the party that doesn't walk in lock-step, the party that has a tent large enough for disagreement. I guess those days are over.
Yep, might as well just vote for Blinkers and Socialism, huh ?
Nuts on the left, nuts on the right, there are no third parties, and if they do pop up, they just throw the election one way or the other. These 2 parties are all that we have. The only parties which have the numbers to be elected.
No way in hell I'll throw the towel in this damn early. The party is convulsing like a MoFo right now, I'm waiting...
| 61 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:23:15pm |
re: #58 dapperdave
Limbaugh has principles and is steadfast in his beliefs, Colin Powell does not, he's just another lame RINO.
so discount him out of hand...who's the puppet here you or him?
| 62 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:23:41pm |
BTW...Does Powell have any buyer's remorse about 0bama yet?
If so, Does it even come up in the interview?
| 63 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:23:43pm |
re: #32 Fenway_Nation
I agree...we need a GOP that can move more forcefully and decisively against talk show hosts and their listeners than we do an 0bama presidency or congress that's trying to foist cap & trade, card check, 0bamacare and another stimulus while they think nobody's looking.
/
It is precisely those talk show hosts (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, Dobbs) and their fanatical followers that are hamstringing our efforts to counter Obama, by making us look like drooling buffoons to precisely the sensible center moderate majority we need in order to effectively oppose him. Such people sure as hell aren't gonna pressure their elected officials on OUR behalf, if we appear to be the panting sycophants of raving crazies, and elected officials already know when the person contacting them is an extremist nutjob, because they've already heard from him/her so many times before.
| 64 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:24:44pm |
re: #62 Fenway_Nation
The interview airs tonight.
| 65 |
Gearhead Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:24:58pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
That's why I don't listen to him. He uses the shield of "it's just entertainment" to say some irresponsible things and, while he sometimes makes a good point or takes a stand I agree with, mostly he just gets on my nerves.
| 66 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:25:15pm |
re: #63 Salamantis
'MODEREATES' fucking put 0bama in the White house in the first place...
| 67 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:25:39pm |
re: #36 Killgore Trout
...and that's why we'll have 8 years of Obama. Maybe even another Democrat after that.
Not really. Rush on one end, Powell on the other with loads of room in the middle means a very expansive GOP!
CAVEAT,,, that is IF Powell doesn't do another 2008 and Rush maintains his popularity
| 68 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:26:14pm |
re: #60 SasquatchOnSteroids
Yep, might as well just vote for Blinkers and Socialism, huh ?
Nuts on the left, nuts on the right, there are no third parties, and if they do pop up, they just throw the election one way or the other. These 2 parties are all that we have. The only parties which have the numbers to be elected.
No way in hell I'll throw the towel in this damn early. The party is convulsing like a MoFo right now, I'm waiting...
I didn't say anything about voting for democrats or socialism. I'm more than willing to vote for a rational conservative. Hope one shows up soon.
| 69 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:26:23pm |
One of my friends Facebook status...
Apparently Barack Obama's health care reform is a way for the government to implement the murder of senior citizens...Guess which Republican Congressman said this.
about a minute ago
Who said that?
| 70 |
albusteve Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:26:23pm |
in America, you are allowed to change your mind...do you?...think about it
| 71 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:26:27pm |
It's not really so hard to be steadfast to stated principles and beliefs when you're a radio personality and don't have to do any political horsetrading to bring bacon your constituents andr get re-elected.
| 72 |
JarHeadLifer Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:26:49pm |
re: #55 Charles
And you know that ... how? Please note that Powell himself has specifically denied this allegation.
Deductive reasoning. John McCain is the embodiment of everything Colin Powell had previously stated he admired in a presidential candidate; He's not married to a party. He'll reach across party lines to form bi-partisan compromise. He's unabashedly anti-torture (whatever that is). And, he's the godfather of campaign finance reform.
Whereas, Barack Obama, in his extremely short Senatorial tenure never once reached across the isle. He never once introduced legislation that was contrary to his party's orthodoxy. And, he raised more money in the history of campaigns after walking-back a campaign promise not to.
What else is left besides race? Ergo, race - at least in part - drove Powell's decision.
| 73 |
yesandno Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:05pm |
1. Rush considers himself a conservative first. Used to be that the conservatives found a home in the GOP...not necessarily true any more.
2. The GOP nominated the candidate the Media wanted, the Democrats wanted, the world wanted...unfortunately the country didn't want him...and neither did Colin Powell. Powell wasn't acting like a GOP member when he came out in support of Obama.
3. Colin Powell could have been President. He didn't have the fire in the belly. Not a problem. But he needs help change his party if he can't support it's candidates.
4. Rush is part entertainer, part analysis. Funny how we believe what Jon Stewart says even though he is a comedian, but not what Rush states because he is only an entertainer. Rush does his homework. Yes he is outrageous at times, but he is almost always on point and sees through all of this crap. He isn't crazy about the GOP that bears no resemblence to the principles that used to exist.
5. Conservatives have been marginalized because every nut case starts out saying they are conservative when what they are is fascist, racist, anti-semetic, etc. And Colin is not a Conservative...so he shouldn't marginalize those that are...the Dems are already great at that game.
| 74 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:09pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
KT - are you talking about the discussion toward the beginning of July? He was referring to his blind followers pushing that agenda, rather than Obama himself. The blind faith of the "Obamabots" doesn't make it seem completely out of realm of possibility to bring up discussions around this absurd topic. The success probability of a move such as this is minuscule at best.
I haven't listened the last few weeks, so maybe he's gone beyond that?
| 75 |
dapperdave Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:09pm |
re: #61 albusteve
Powell claims he's a republican but voted for one of the biggest socialist this countries ever seen, I don't know where he's coming from but I do know his opinions mean very little to me.
| 76 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:18pm |
I find it interesting how so many here really sound more like democrats than republicans. Rush is on the right, and the majority of republicans agree with most of what he says. If you ignore him, his views, his listeners, you will lose the election(s).
He said McCain was a bad choice, and couldn't win. He was right. (Heck even Charles called that one). If you really feel that Rush is too far out there, etc. Then maybe you should join the democratic party, because you probably don't belong in the republican one. Rush sticks to their core values, if you can not deal with that, it's your problem, not his.
And quit making statements about what Rush has said or what he believes with out links to a transcript or some such. Most people who say negative things about Rush never listen to him and quote him out of context, or just plain make things up.
| 77 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:33pm |
re: #35 Korla Pundit
They should be afraid of Rush, along with ALL of their constituents. That's what creates liberty.
They want Rush and everybody else to fear THEM. That is called tyranny.
And who cares what the big Obama supporter thinks about what conservatives should or shouldn't do? He's had his moment, and he voted with his skin.
You just trashed one of America's finest Generals and implied he was raciest and voting his skin color..
You have insulted America...The United States Army...And a fine man...
I think he voted for who ever he voted for with his personal principles.
You couldn't hold his jock strap..Jeez
| 78 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:39pm |
I don't care so much Gen. / Sec. Powell chose to endorse Obama.
The timing of his announcement was calculated to do maximum damage to the party and candidate he professed to belong to.
| 79 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:27:46pm |
re: #67 sattv4u2
Not really. The inmates are running the asylum at this point. I find it very hard to imagine an electable candidate getting the GOP nomination. The base simply wouldn't allow a realist on the ticket.
| 80 |
capitalist piglet Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:28:00pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
Is this something you heard him say? Would it be possible to source that, with some context?
| 81 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:28:21pm |
re: #41 Salamantis
Michael Steele.
Okay, that's a name. This is the same Michael Steele who, while campaigning in Maryland (?) was pelted by Democrat supporters with Oreos to show that 'he is Black outside, and White inside'?
So, what specific instance can you cite where Mike criticized Rush and then has to backtrack?
| 82 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:28:37pm |
re: #66 Fenway_Nation
'MODEREATES' fucking put 0bama in the White house in the first place...
Right. And they could have put McCain in the White House but they didn't.
I don't care how much any of you like or dislike moderates. Elections are won or lost by who convinces the middle to vote for them. We best start finding those candidates and policies, otherwise we're going to be a minority party for a long time.
| 83 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:29:00pm |
re: #66 Fenway_Nation
'MODEREATES' fucking put 0bama in the White house in the first place...
And that was because...?
The moderates saw the Repubs as wacko extremists. And those electronic ranters I mentioned are only continuing to set that opinion in hardening concrete.
| 85 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:29:14pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
Kilgore, I don't listen to Rush at all these days but I have in the past. I believe you listen even less. I say that because there is small chance what you are paraphrasing was meant in any seriousness. If it was, I would like to see the context/transcript because your assertion has no grounding otherwise.
This all lack seriousness and serious times.
My take is that is ridiculous for high public figures like Powell or Obama or whomever to obsess over a talk show host. What the hell is that all about. Stupid, say I.
| 86 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:29:38pm |
re: #54 Sharmuta
That's just it- they do have contrary opinions and then they're bullied into shutting up. It's conditioning- after a couple of tries, they just stop. That's bad for this country. We need healthy debate- not stifled debate.
You just described Nancy Pelosi and her handling of the the House Democrats.
| 88 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:29:57pm |
re: #82 Sharmuta
That damn pesky squishy middle 20% is where the election is won or lost.
| 89 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:04pm |
re: #79 Killgore Trout
Not really. The inmates are running the asylum at this point. I find it very hard to imagine an electable candidate getting the GOP nomination. The base simply wouldn't allow a realist on the ticket.
Yeah. Good thing the "base" didn't allow McCain, or Bush before him, or Dole, or Bush Sr. ,,,
| 90 |
jhn1 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:09pm |
I can believe that.
They have been pretending to be conservative, but moderate friendly. while being left moderate, or even RINO, and conservative unfriendly (behind the scenes of course)
Rush doesn't give that a pass at all.
Look, if you want to run as D-lite (like Illinois gov candidate Topinka), just admit it and run on it. And that is fine.
If you want to run as a conservative, or at least conservative friendly, then you should govern in that manner. When they don't, then Rush holds it up front and center.
| 91 |
freetoken Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:10pm |
Uh oh... looks like a ditto head has been insulted...
| 92 |
Cheechako Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:18pm |
Colin Powell is correct. Rush is the self-anointed Grand Pooh-Bah of the GOP’s SoCon Purity and Correctness Committee. Other Committee members include Sean Hannity and Pat Buchanan. The Committee’s Court Jester is Glen Beck. If any GOP candidate fails to get the Committee’s blessing they are hung out to dry as unsuitable to wear the GOP label. Millions of listeners (and some voters) will follow the Committee’s direction in the next election.
| 93 |
dapperdave Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:24pm |
re: #78 jcm
Excellent point, the man has no convictions, republican my a$$.
| 94 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:30:50pm |
re: #74 ArmyWife
Limbaugh: Obama Laying Groundwork for Third Term
It's just crazy talk. He's a loon.
| 96 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:31:24pm |
re: #86 NelsFree
You just described Nancy Pelosi and her handling of the the House Democrats.
Yeah- because it's always Teh Left!
It's my opinion we need to take care of the plank in our own eye.
| 97 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:31:28pm |
re: #82 Sharmuta
Right. And they could have put McCain in the White House but they didn't.
I don't care how much any of you like or dislike moderates. Elections are won or lost by who convinces the middle to vote for them. We best start finding those candidates and policies, otherwise we're going to be a minority party for a long time.
Dem-lite! Dem-Lite! RINO! Traitor!
/
| 98 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:31:34pm |
re: #81 NelsFree
Okay, that's a name. This is the same Michael Steele who, while campaigning in Maryland (?) was pelted by Democrat supporters with Oreos to show that 'he is Black outside, and White inside'?
So, what specific instance can you cite where Mike criticized Rush and then has to backtrack?
[Link: www.politico.com...]
| 99 |
freetoken Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:31:59pm |
| 100 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:32:26pm |
re: #8 LGoPs
He's wrong.
Rush mobilizes his audience to call and e-mail anyone who incurs his wrath like no one else. And they threaten politician's with the one thing they simply cannot tolerate- the withholding of funds. *Of course* they are scared. There is no other voice on the Conservative side of the radio or TV aisle who has the juice to say, effectively, "I disagree with Rusty on this issue. You shouldn't abandon this politician based on an opinion that conflicts with his."
He is The Man. He has no peer.
| 101 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:32:35pm |
re: #92 Cheechako
Gonna disagree about Buchanan. MSNBC has him on quite a bit, too damn much for me, but how much influence does that damn anit-semitic asshole still have?
| 102 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:32:37pm |
re: #82 Sharmuta
re: #66 Fenway_Nation
Right. And they could have put McCain in the White House but they didn't.I don't care how much any of you like or dislike moderates. Elections are won or lost by who convinces the middle to vote for them. We best start finding those candidates and policies, otherwise we're going to be a minority party for a long time.
And how many elections will the GOP win if they continue to let CNN dictate the terms of what's 'moderate' and 'centrist'?
| 103 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:33:09pm |
re: #94 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh: Obama Laying Groundwork for Third Term
It's just crazy talk. He's a loon.
You really don't get it, do you?
| 104 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:33:17pm |
More crazy talking lunatics...
Michelle Malkin talks with Glenn Beck about Obama's "Culture of Corruption"
They think SEIU and ACORN are a shadow government pulling Obama's radical strings to destroy America!
| 105 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:33:19pm |
re: #68 Sharmuta
I didn't say anything about voting for democrats or socialism. I'm more than willing to vote for a rational conservative. Hope one shows up soon.
Well, I'm with you on that and No you didn't say that. I apologize for my little snap there.
| 106 |
LGoPs Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:33:29pm |
re: #100 austin_blue
Rush mobilizes his audience to call and e-mail anyone who incurs his wrath like no one else. And they threaten politician's with the one thing they simply cannot tolerate- the withholding of funds. *Of course* they are scared. There is no other voice on the Conservative side of the radio or TV aisle who has the juice to say, effectively, "I disagree with Rusty on this issue. You shouldn't abandon this politician based on an opinion that conflicts with his."
He is The Man. He has no peer.
I agree. When I said wrong it was in response to the post above me.
| 107 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:33:49pm |
re: #102 Fenway_Nation
And how many elections will the GOP win if they continue to let CNN dictate the terms of what's 'moderate' and 'centrist'?
Who said anything about CNN? The voters spoke.
| 108 |
dapperdave Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:01pm |
re: #101 pingjockey
but how much influence does that damn anit-semitic asshole still have?
None, he's on MSNBC!
| 109 |
Mike McDaniel Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:16pm |
Of course they're afraid! Limbaugh has more support than the Republican leadership. If Rush put his weight behind it, the entire GOP leadership would be out of a job.
Not to mention that he's not trying to get reelected...which means Limbaugh can advocate policies that make sense. He doesn't have to bootlick the propaganda press.
| 110 |
Racer X Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:24pm |
re: #78 jcm
I don't care so much Gen. / Sec. Powell chose to endorse Obama.
The timing of his announcement was calculated to do maximum damage to the party and candidate he professed to belong to.
Powell wanted Obama to win, for whatever reason.
| 111 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:29pm |
re: #76 Banner
I find it interesting how so many here really sound more like democrats than republicans. Many here are democratsRush is on the right, and the majority of republicans agree with most of what he says.Many believe much of what he says, but most would agree it's important to analyze and research things on your own in an effort to formulate opinions If you ignore him, his views, his listeners, you will lose the election(s). I'm not sure ignoring Rush will cause election loss - I think straying from core conservative values will end in election loss. For the record, Pat Buchanan does NOT embody core conservative values
He said McCain was a bad choice, and couldn't win. He was right. (Heck even Charles called that one). McCain lost for a lot of reasons, Rush was not the orchestrator of said lossIf you really feel that Rush is too far out there, etc. Then maybe you should join the democratic party, because you probably don't belong in the republican one. We need to agree to disagree - Rush is not perfect, he has very strong points, and very weak points. It is OK, and healthy, to be able to differentiate between themRush sticks to their core values, if you can not deal with that, it's your problem, not his. Well, not really. Read what I've said above
And quit making statements about what Rush has said or what he believes with out links to a transcript or some such. Most people who say negative things about Rush never listen to him and quote him out of context, or just plain make things up.
This is true a lot of the time, but he has said some goofy things. Really.
| 112 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:32pm |
re: #102 Fenway_Nation
What do you think a moderate is? What do you think a conservative is?
I don't let the msm dictate to me what I think these things are, and I don't think others do either.
| 113 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:34:49pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
More crazy talking lunatics...
Michelle Malkin talks with Glenn Beck about Obama's "Culture of Corruption"
[Video]They think SEIU and ACORN are a shadow government pulling Obama's radical strings to destroy America!
Well...ACORN IS a problem. Not a shadow government, but they have way, WAY too much fucking control.
| 114 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:35:01pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
I always thought ACORN and SEIU were just your standard criminal enterprises, not any kind of shadow gov't. Just trying to raid the cookie jar for what ever they can loot.
| 115 |
Jim in Virginia Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:35:13pm |
Sorry, but anyone who endorsed a Democrat for President has lost the right to give advice to the Republican party.
| 116 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:35:25pm |
Powell is correct, there are probably GOP leaders who are afraid to publicly disagree with Rush Limbaugh. Whether this is good or bad for the GOP probably depends on the issue of disagreement.
There are probably some not very fiscally conservative GOP politicians who are scared of Limbaugh for good reason, they are as wasteful with money as liberal democrats.
There are probably some not very socially conservative GOP politicians who would gain little from challenging Limbaugh, even if he is wrong. This unfortunately does not help the GOP, as it allows a barrier to continue to exist between the modern GOP and those with more moderate or libertarian social views.
| 119 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:36:04pm |
re: #109 Mike McDaniel
Of course they're afraid! Limbaugh has more support than the Republican leadership. If Rush put his weight behind it, the entire GOP leadership would be out of a job.
Not to mention that he's not trying to get reelected...which means Limbaugh can advocate policies that make sense. He doesn't have to bootlick the propaganda press.
As long as he jerks off the crazies, they'll mob up and storm any politician with torches and pitchforks on his say-so, regardless of who is right or wrong.
| 120 |
y0kkles Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:36:05pm |
Powell voting for Obama means he isn't a conservative. Sorry. That's like saying you are a Christian but you don't believe Jesus ever existed.
Rush and others like him don't do us any favors with their attacks and yelling. Sure it's entertaining to those who are already conservative, but it turns off other people, people we should be trying to win over.
That's not to say we abandon the principles. We just need to explain them better. And when it comes to talk radio, better means without insulting and all of that.
I much prefer the approach of Dennis Prager. Always calm. Always respectful. And still holds to conservative principles. I would say he wins more minds to our cause than the other hosts.
| 121 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:36:18pm |
So let me get this straight...if Powell let's loose the fact that the 0bama administration is a disappointment in that interview, the narrative will still be 'OMG! The GOP iz askairt uv Rush Limbaw!'?
| 122 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:36:47pm |
re: #112 Sharmuta
What do you think a moderate is? What do you think a conservative is?
I don't let the msm dictate to me what I think these things are, and I don't think others do either.
I have to disagree. I think others don't possess the level of knowledge or interest in issues like we do. Hardly anyone knows the nuances behind the bullshit mainstream media and the things they do. There are TONS of people who are not interested enough to make an informed decision, yet still go out and vote based on what they've learned through what the media tells them.
It's sad but true.
| 123 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:36:51pm |
As Mike Huckabee used to say, "if you're taking flak, you must be over the target." Whether you like him or not, you have to believe that Rush has hit a nerve with Obama and his supporters, like Powell. In his first week as President, Obama specifically mentioned Limbaugh as a "guy you can't listen to..." and Powell seems to have picked up that meme.
Me doth think they protest too much.
| 124 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:37:13pm |
re: #114 pingjockey
I always thought ACORN and SEIU were just your standard criminal enterprises, not any kind of shadow gov't. Just trying to raid the cookie jar for what ever they can loot.
Probably. They are small time operators. Especially ACORN. It has no real influence on anything. The ODS sufferers have transformed them into some giant bogey man. Kinda like Haliburton was to the BDS crowd.
| 125 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:37:37pm |
re: #115 Jim in Virginia
Sorry, but anyone who endorsed a Democrat for President has lost the right to give advice to the Republican party.
If Palin had said this people would be praising her courage and her disdain for "politics as usual".
Sometimes you have to accept a good message from a bad messenger.
| 126 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:37:38pm |
re: #105 SasquatchOnSteroids
Thank you for the apology.
Perhaps I should state that while I'm highly displeased with my party at this time, it in no way means I'm endorsing the other side. The term I would use for my position on the GOP at this time is: Tough Love. It is okay for us to criticize our own and still want to be on the team.
| 127 |
Ringo the Gringo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:37:52pm |
Haven't read any of the comments, I just watched the snippet...
From what I saw, I think Colin Powell's right.
| 128 |
pink freud Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:38:35pm |
re: #118 buzzsawmonkey
"None of which has anything to do with the Republicans looking like "wacko extremists."
It's the new meme for those on the left. If they say it loud enough and often enough then maybe they will begin to be believed.
I know not one conservative who is a "wacko extremist".
| 130 |
pingjockey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:38:47pm |
re: #124 Killgore Trout
Not a bad analogy. My only issue with ACORN is huge, voter fraud! So that right there puts them on my "Out damned spot" list!
| 131 |
Gearhead Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:38:50pm |
re: #126 Sharmuta
Thank you for the apology.
Perhaps I should state that while I'm highly displeased with my party at this time, it in no way means I'm endorsing the other side. The term I would use for my position on the GOP at this time is: Tough Love. It is okay for us to criticize our own and still want to be on the team.
Well said.
| 132 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:39:11pm |
re: #129 buzzsawmonkey
ACORN was largely responsible for setting up the subprime meltdown, but that's small potatoes, right?
That's a myth.
| 133 |
Frater Eosphoros Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:39:11pm |
Thus it is written in the Book of Jubilees 9:93; "And hither the warrior know as Rusham, slew the afeared man-elephants of that mighty nation and took their hides as his own." Yep, they sure are.. says right here.
| 134 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:39:18pm |
re: #120 y0kkles
Powell voting for Obama means he isn't a conservative. Sorry. That's like saying you are a Christian but you don't believe Jesus ever existed.
Rush and others like him don't do us any favors with their attacks and yelling. Sure it's entertaining to those who are already conservative, but it turns off other people, people we should be trying to win over.
That's not to say we abandon the principles. We just need to explain them better. And when it comes to talk radio, better means without insulting and all of that.
I much prefer the approach of Dennis Prager. Always calm. Always respectful. And still holds to conservative principles. I would say he wins more minds to our cause than the other hosts.
Weren't the very same people, INCLUDING Limbaugh, screaming that McCain was no conservative during the campaign? And then they skate away with no blame whatsoever, because people let them?
Short-term memory. It's a nutjob thing.
| 135 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:39:24pm |
re: #111 ArmyWife
re: #111 ArmyWife
This is true a lot of the time, but he has said some goofy things. Really.
When I say that if you 'ignore what he says' I'm not implying that there are all these rushbots out there that hang on his every word and do exactly what he says, what I -am- saying is that his views reflect the mainstream republican thought. The average man. A lot of people agree with him because they hold those very self same views. Ignoring Rush is like ignoring the barometer. It's still gonna rain, criticizing it isn't going to change the weather.
| 136 |
JacksonTn Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:39:30pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
More crazy talking lunatics...
Michelle Malkin talks with Glenn Beck about Obama's "Culture of Corruption"
[Video]
They think SEIU and ACORN are a shadow government pulling Obama's radical strings to destroy America!
KT ... I have not clicked on your link as I do not listen to Malkin but Obama does owe very very much to SEIU ... they basically do own him ... I am not talking shadow government but anyone who thinks he does not have a huge debt to repay to them are kidding themselves ...
[Link: www.chicagotribune.com...]
The SEIU spent $60 million to help elect Obama, according to the union. Stern says the group deployed 100,000 volunteers during the campaign, including 3,000 who worked on the election full-time, and made 15 million phone calls.
As president, Obama has continued to derive political benefits from the union. It was SEIU's health chief, Dennis Rivera, who helped bring industry to the table to start talks on a health-care overhaul -- a conversation that led to the public declaration of industry's intention to help.
***
| 139 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:40:23pm |
Colin Powell is speaking the truth, that Republican party leaders are afraid of provoking Rush Limbaugh. It doesn't matter what you think of Powell's politics to recognize that he's right. Since Limbaugh doesn't have any particular responsibility other than to his own pocketbook, that isn't a great situation.
| 140 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:40:23pm |
Rush is a creationist.
Rush has skated the borderline of acceptability on racism since Obama became President, tooting the racist dog whistle almost daily
Rush made a terrible mistake in the "I Hope he fails" comment
Rush slammed the dems for 8 yrs for talking down the economy, now he does it almost daily.
Otherwise, he's ok often seeing essentials of Washington politics that others don't.
Pre-2006 he was confident and positive, since then he's become angry, whiny, and wheedling. I really can't stand to listen to him very long anymore since his tone and posture has changed.
| 141 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:40:27pm |
re: #128 pink freud
"None of which has anything to do with the Republicans looking like "wacko extremists."
It's the new meme for those on the left. If they say it loud enough and often enough then maybe they will begin to be believed.
I know not one conservative who is a "wacko extremist".
Nirthers...Paulians... you may not know them, but they are most definitely out there.
| 142 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:42:00pm |
re: #141 austin_blue
So let's use a broad brush, why don't we?
| 143 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:42:11pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh's a loon. Last week he was talking about Obama is going to declare himself dictator and dissolve democracy. He a nut and he's taking the party with him.
I heard him say the same thing about Bill Clinton.
| 144 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:42:16pm |
re: #129 buzzsawmonkey
ACORN was largely responsible for setting up the subprime meltdown, but that's small potatoes, right?
Of course. Just small potatoes. LMAO.
| 146 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:42:28pm |
re: #123 LionOfDixon
Quoting Huckabee doesn't bolster arguments. Huckabee is the one we ought to be concerned with, only slightly more ahead on the concern-o-meter is Ron Paul. Rush? Pretty low - he doesn't have the potential to run for office and be called "President".
| 147 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:43:28pm |
re: #139 jaunte
Republican party leaders are afraid of provoking Rush Limbaugh
iirc,, wasn't there a dust up between Rush and McCain who was THE presidential candidate, hence the Republican "leader" at the time. Don't I recall McCain chastizing Rush over something he said re" Obama
| 148 |
Athens Runaway Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:44:02pm |
re: #146 ArmyWife
Yeah, a guy who says that following the Bible is more important than following the Constitution, that's kinda scary.
| 149 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:44:17pm |
re: #142 Fenway_Nation
So let's use a broad brush, why don't we?
That was response in kind:
"I know not one conservative who is a "wacko extremist"."
And it was a fair response.
| 150 |
Gearhead Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:44:57pm |
re: #143 Alouette
I heard him say the same thing about Bill Clinton.
And the other side said the same thing about Bush - Martial law and all that.
Plenty of loons to go around.
| 151 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:45:01pm |
re: #147 sattv4u2
Republican party leaders are afraid of provoking Rush Limbaugh
iirc,, wasn't there a dust up between Rush and McCain who was THE presidential candidate, hence the Republican "leader" at the time. Don't I recall McCain chastizing Rush over something he said re" Obama
Good point, they've disagreed with him and chastized him a number of times. Then they lost the election and started to realize maybe they should have listened just a little bit more.
| 152 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:45:31pm |
re: #149 austin_blue
What is it with 'progressives' and the word 'fair'?
| 153 |
yesandno Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:45:31pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
We have not been paying attention. Maybe everyone should. SEIU is a problem. ACORN is a problem. Let us not damn the message because we don't like the messengers. Things in this nation are changing faster then one can read a 1000 page bill that has this and that in it and parts that will be written in later.
Great.
| 154 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:45:52pm |
re: #124 Killgore Trout
Probably. They are small time operators. Especially ACORN. It has no real influence on anything. The ODS sufferers have transformed them into some giant bogey man. Kinda like Haliburton was to the BDS crowd.
ACORN fraud was a factor in the WA '04 Gov. race.
Not so small time.
| 155 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:06pm |
re: #116 horse
There are probably some not very socially conservative GOP politicians who would gain little from challenging Limbaugh, even if he is wrong. This unfortunately does not help the GOP, as it allows a barrier to continue to exist between the modern GOP and those with more moderate or libertarian social views.
Solid conservative principles got Reagan elected, and helped him defeat the Soviet Union. It is my opinion that, IF the Republican Presidential Candidate runs on a solidly conservative platform, the GOP has a much better chance of winning the White House in 2012.
| 156 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:07pm |
re: #146 ArmyWife
I'm not saying I support or supported Huckabee...I didn't. But it is a good quote and has a fair ring of truth about it.
| 157 |
pink freud Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:15pm |
re: #152 Fenway_Nation
What is it with 'progressives' and the word 'fair'?
Appearance is everything. Reality ...and substance, not so much.
| 158 |
Going_gone Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:28pm |
What's with all the liberals and RINOs in here defending Colon Powell and attacking Rush? Sheesh, when did this place get taken over by moonbats?
| 159 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:29pm |
re: #151 Banner
Good point, they've disagreed with him and chastized him a number of times. Then they lost the election and started to realize maybe they should have listened just a little bit more.
Perhaps, but it disproves the entire Rush Runs The Party/ The Party Is Afraid To Critisize Him posts here, imho
| 160 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:40pm |
re: #135 Banner
re: #111 ArmyWife
When I say that if you 'ignore what he says' I'm not implying that there are all these rushbots out there that hang on his every word and do exactly what he says, what I -am- saying is that his views reflect the mainstream republican thought. The average man. A lot of people agree with him because they hold those very self same views. Ignoring Rush is like ignoring the barometer. It's still gonna rain, criticizing it isn't going to change the weather.
Yeah, but when the barometer is also urinating on the lawn, insulting your neighbors and turning the association against you, it might be time to challenge him on those unacceptable behaviors and get him back on task, or get another barometer.
| 161 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:43pm |
Rush really breaks my heart, to tell the truth. I owe my conservative conversion to him. He used to focus more on fiscal issues- he did a great job expressing them at CPAC for a few minutes, and I wish he'd stick to them.
| 162 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:52pm |
re: #152 Fenway_Nation
What is it with 'progressives' and the word 'fair'?
Okey dokey, then, "valid".
| 163 |
Racer X Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:46:53pm |
Obama sucks. His sucking potential looks to increase in the coming months. The prospects of a long term Obama-suck are likely. God forbid we end up with a two-term Obama suckfest.
| 164 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:47:32pm |
re: #162 austin_blue
I find your changing of words on the fly to be wholly unfair.
/
| 165 |
SpaceJesus Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:47:40pm |
so a mentally insane oxycontin addict wields the most power in the only party that can stand up to hope and change?
wow. we are all completely screwed.
| 167 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:47:48pm |
re: #155 NelsFree
Solid conservative principles got Reagan elected, and helped him defeat the Soviet Union. It is my opinion that, IF the Republican Presidential Candidate runs on a solidly conservative platform, the GOP has a much better chance of winning the White House in 2012.
OK- what do you think "conservatism" means?
| 168 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:47:54pm |
re: #158 Going_gone
Keep up posts like that and you'll have a future that matches your screename
| 169 |
Banner Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:01pm |
re: #160 horse
Yeah, but when the barometer is also urinating on the lawn, insulting your neighbors and turning the association against you, it might be time to challenge him on those unacceptable behaviors and get him back on task, or get another barometer.
Well yes, but that's Jon Stewart. We're talking about Rush Limbaugh here however and he doesn't do any of that.
| 170 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:14pm |
re: #51 Sheepdogess
Actually, it's the Obama left that is terrified of Rush.
That's crazy. I know the new meme is always "Liberals are terrified of X, that's why they object to it so much!" (insert Palin, Rush, or nirthism for X)--but I assure you that neither the "Obama left" or the Democratic party is afraid of Rush. They're laughing their heads off at Rush and at the GOP's fear of him. Keith Olbermann always refers to him as "comedian Rush Limbaugh".
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee even mocks him by having an automated "I'm Sorry Rush" apology-maker for Republicans.
[Link: www.dccc.org...]
Frankly, I'm only afraid of Rush's followers, not Rush.
| 171 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:23pm |
There are those within the Republican party who have been steadily diminishing it for years now. It started with the oxymoronically named "Club for Growth" when they went RINO hunting around 2005, and hasn't stopped yet. By time they are done the R's will be a pup tent party of permanent irrelevance.
| 172 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:33pm |
re: #168 sattv4u2
Is going_gone sharkjumper's sockpuppet?
| 173 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:40pm |
You can have the conservative platform, but you have to explain WHY the conservative platform is better than the liberal platform. Since conservatism is complicated at times (as simple as it is), you need clearly constructed messages. You cant put conservatism in platitudes like "hope" and "change", unfortunately.
| 174 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:48:51pm |
re: #161 Sharmuta
Rush really breaks my heart, to tell the truth. I owe my conservative conversion to him. He used to focus more on fiscal issues- he did a great job expressing them at CPAC for a few minutes, and I wish he'd stick to them.
so you're really a neo (new) conservative?
| 175 |
Racer X Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:49:23pm |
Rush is a clown. He makes me laugh. Does that make me bad?
| 176 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:49:28pm |
re: #158 Going_gone
What's with all the liberals and RINOs in here defending Colon Powell and attacking Rush? Sheesh, when did this place get taken over by moonbats?
Here's a nice picture for you:
[Link: www.flickr.com...]
| 177 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:50:18pm |
| 178 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:50:32pm |
re: #173 TheMatrix31
You can have the conservative platform, but you have to explain WHY the conservative platform is better than the liberal platform. Since conservatism is complicated at times (as simple as it is), you need clearly constructed messages. You cant put conservatism in platitudes like "hope" and "change", unfortunately.
I think we need to all sit down and figure out what "conservative" means.
| 179 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:50:40pm |
re: #90 jhn1
I can believe that.
They have been pretending to be conservative, but moderate friendly. while being left moderate, or even RINO, and conservative unfriendly (behind the scenes of course)Rush doesn't give that a pass at all.
Look, if you want to run as D-lite (like Illinois gov candidate Topinka), just admit it and run on it. And that is fine.
If you want to run as a conservative, or at least conservative friendly, then you should govern in that manner. When they don't, then Rush holds it up front and center.
Our side is in a shitload of hurt when one's willingness to fellate TV and radio commentators becomes the litmus test of whether or not one is Republican or conservative.
| 180 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:50:45pm |
re: #177 SasquatchOnSteroids
I think it's a good one for Stinky Beaumont.
| 181 |
pink freud Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:51:11pm |
re: #178 Sharmuta
I think we need to all sit down and figure out what "conservative" means.
I think most of us already have.
| 182 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:51:22pm |
re: #174 sattv4u2
so you're really a neo (new) conservative?
No. Is that the new insult with "conservatives"? To call someone a neo-con instead of a RINO?
| 183 |
Racer X Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:51:28pm |
Oh, and I like Rush. I'm not dumb enough to think he is something he is not. He is a clown.
| 184 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:51:52pm |
re: #181 pink freud
I think most of us already have.
Really? Why hasn't anyone answered my question then?
| 185 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:52:24pm |
re: #152 Fenway_Nation
What is it with 'progressives' and the word 'fair'?
Some history on the Progressive Movement:
[Link: www.heritage.org...]
Hillary Clinton supports Progressivism.
| 186 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:53:15pm |
re: #182 Sharmuta
No. Is that the new insult with "conservatives"? To call someone a neo-con instead of a RINO?
I thought "Neo-Con" was code for Juice.
| 187 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:53:19pm |
Because I'm pretty sure so-con, fisc-cons and security hawks would all give differing ideas on what "conservative" means.
| 188 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:53:21pm |
re: #182 Sharmuta
No. Is that the new insult with "conservatives"? To call someone a neo-con instead of a RINO?
Not at all. I use the term NEO for what it's meant as,,, NEW (hence I added it)
You stated you converted to conservatisim due to Rush's influence. By my calender, being a man of 56 years and being a conservative for as long as I've been politically aware (think late 60's) you would be "NEW" to me!
| 189 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:53:42pm |
re: #173 TheMatrix31
You can have the conservative platform, but you have to explain WHY the conservative platform is better than the liberal platform. Since conservatism is complicated at times (as simple as it is), you need clearly constructed messages. You cant put conservatism in platitudes like "hope" and "change", unfortunately.
On the other hand "Morning in America" only works if you have a clear cut but limited agenda.
| 190 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:54:16pm |
re: #178 Sharmuta
I agree. In doing so, we must understand that the definition may encompass those who hold ideas that on their face, appear contrary to our own - for example, freedom of religion means supporting the right be a creationist. Now that doesn't mean we usurp science class, but it just may be a creationist holding office - so long as they allow science to be taught.
| 191 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:54:22pm |
re: #158 Going_gone
What's with all the liberals and RINOs in here defending Colon Powell and attacking Rush? Sheesh, when did this place get taken over by moonbats?
We defend an ex-Army General.. Whom does not vote for His leader by the color of his skin...I don't care who he voted for...That is not the way the Army rolls...Because of that you think I'm a moonbat? I'm a fair man
Talk about his politics.agree or disagree..Leave his skin color out of it...
| 192 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:55:14pm |
re: #155 NelsFree
Solid conservative principles got Reagan elected, and helped him defeat the Soviet Union. It is my opinion that, IF the Republican Presidential Candidate runs on a solidly conservative platform, the GOP has a much better chance of winning the White House in 2012.
Yes it did, he emphasized the key issues of the time around liberty, freedom and getting government out of our lives during economically challenging times. The social con issues were back burner, where they belong, and there was no populist bs. I agree, the real deal politician pushing this message and approach could work again, but they can not stray into the social con and populist mine fields.
| 193 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:55:21pm |
re: #184 Sharmuta
Really? Why hasn't anyone answered my question then?
Maybe we needs a broader discussion of Sowell's concept of the constrained vision.
| 194 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:55:33pm |
This seems to me to be a chicken and egg question. Has Rush changed or has the GOP. Rush has always been controversial, outspoken and loathed by many. However, he has a large and loyal following.
On the other hand, the GOP has changed drastically since it was the party of Reagan. By and large it has moved to more pandering in identity politics, has moved away from balanced budgets and smaller government, and state's rights.
The New Federalism of the Reagan era has gone by the wayside. The new GOP, although not at all to the extent of the Democrats, seems to believe that, well yes...most problems can be solved in Washington.
The modern GOP seems to have shifted over to the left a lot more than Rush has moved to the right or, in the alternative as some claim, towards insanity.
| 195 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:55:39pm |
re: #152 Fenway_Nation
What is it with 'progressives' and the word 'fair'?
Justice, equality of outcome.
“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
Alexis de Tocqueville
Substitute "progressive" for "socialism."
| 197 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:56:01pm |
re: #184 Sharmuta
Really? Why hasn't anyone answered my question then?
I think it means different things to different people.
For me, it's mostly strong foreign policy, smart economic policy, states rights for all the social crap. I can't think of other stuff now.
| 198 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:56:23pm |
re: #191 HoosierHoops
We defend an ex-Army General.. Whom does not vote for His leader by the color of his skin...I don't care who he voted for...That is not the way the Army rolls...Because of that you think I'm a moonbat? I'm a fair man
Talk about his politics.agree or disagree..Leave his skin color out of it...
Thank you. Exactly right. The O even had white people vote for him! Gasp!
| 199 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:56:33pm |
re: #165 SpaceJesus
so a mentally insane oxycontin addict wields the most power in the only party that can stand up to hope and change?
wow. we are all completely screwed.
Unjustified accusation. ad hominem attack. Polarization.
Par for your course SJ.
| 200 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:56:36pm |
re: #191 HoosierHoops
Does this mean that you defend Benedict Arnold. He too was an American Army General.
| 201 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:56:37pm |
re: #193 jaunte
Maybe we needs a broader discussion of Sowell's concept of the constrained vision.
I would dearly love that.
| 202 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:57:00pm |
Rush urged his listeners to vote for Obama in the Democratic primary, in order to destroy Hillary. That was "Operation Chaos."
How'd that work out for ya, dittoheads?
| 203 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:57:11pm |
re: #183 Racer X
Oh, and I like Rush. I'm not dumb enough to think he is something he is not. He is a clown.
I have no problem with people who listen to Rush for entertainment. Hell, I do too whenever I have a long roadtrip in the US. I love right wing talk radio-- for entertainment-- whenever I get a chance to listen to it.
I worry about the people who don't realise that Rush is a clown. The vast majority of his fans aren't in on the joke, unfortunately.
(also, Rush does say some terrible, indefensible things sometimes, like his Oreo comment earlier)
| 204 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:57:12pm |
re: #184 Sharmuta
Really? Why hasn't anyone answered my question then?
It's like Justice Brennans answer on the porn issue. Can't define itm but knows it if he sees it
| 205 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:58:02pm |
re: #200 LionOfDixon
Your comparison does not work unless you are calling Powell a traitor to his country. Are you?
| 206 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:58:02pm |
re: #197 TheMatrix31
I think it means different things to different people.
For me, it's mostly strong foreign policy, smart economic policy, states rights for all the social crap. I can't think of other stuff now.
Thank you for your response, and you're exactly right. It does mean different things to different people, which is why I think we need to find some consensus.
| 207 |
Ojoe Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:58:35pm |
Any party with 'leaders' who are afraid of anything is no good.
Throw it out.
"Non Timbeo Mala"
San Gabriel Mountains heading for sunset. Towercam, Pacific time zone.
BBL
| 208 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:58:57pm |
re: #158 Going_gone
What's with all the liberals and RINOs in here defending Colon Powell and attacking Rush? Sheesh, when did this place get taken over by moonbats?
This is precisely the kinda thing that Powell is talking about. The more the dittohead defenders in here berate the least little criticism of their Limbaugh demigod, the more they prove Powell's point. And they are completely clueless that they are proving the very point that they are inveiging against.
/laughing through my tears at irony thick as treacle
| 209 |
Kronocide Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:08pm |
re: #165 SpaceJesus
so a mentally insane oxycontin addict wields the most power in the only party that can stand up to hope and change?
wow. we are all completely screwed.
I think you have a touch of tourettes.
| 210 |
Pawn of the Oppressor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:14pm |
I'm afraid of anybody I see on political television.
/kidding... sorta
| 211 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:19pm |
LionofDixon: Is Colin Powell working for Putin? Is he an enemy to the country?
| 212 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:24pm |
Benedict Arnold was a patriot in the beginning, but for reasons due to treatment he flipped.
| 213 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:25pm |
re: #206 Sharmuta
Thank you for your response, and you're exactly right. It does mean different things to different people, which is why I think we need to find some consensus.
Which is a shame, because I feel like so many of the camps have some really good ideas, yet it's going to be so difficult to unify because some of the bad ideas are dealbreakers in the larger picture.
| 214 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:31pm |
re: #178 Sharmuta
I think we need to all sit down and figure out what "conservative" means.
1. Strong Defense.
2. Lower taxes.
3. Smaller Government.
4. Less interference in the Private Sector.
5. Removing retrictive regulations on small businesses.
6. Charity from the Private sector instead of Government.
7. Balanced Government budgets.
8. Paying down the National Debt.
Want more?
| 215 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 6:59:39pm |
re: #200 LionOfDixon
Does this mean that you defend Benedict Arnold. He too was an American Army General.
That turned into an American Traitor...Do you really want to go down this path?
| 217 |
Truck Monkey Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:00:00pm |
re: #202 Alouette
Rush urged his listeners to vote for Obama in the Democratic primary, in order to destroy Hillary. That was "Operation Chaos."
How'd that work out for ya, dittoheads?
Wrong. It was the other way around. He wanted to help Hillary hang around a little longer. In the end, I don't think it made much difference either way. Just having a bit of fun is all.
| 218 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:00:02pm |
re: #206 Sharmuta
Thank you for your response, and you're exactly right. It does mean different things to different people, which is why I think we need to find some consensus.
Yes! And consensus isn't a voting, everyone is happy state - it is merely getting to a point that we can all live with.
| 219 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:00:20pm |
re: #169 Banner
Well yes, but that's Jon Stewart. We're talking about Rush Limbaugh here however and he doesn't do any of that.
You think using the term "oreo" as he recently did is not ala Jon Stewart?
| 220 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:00:57pm |
re: #215 HoosierHoops
That turned into an American Traitor...Do you really want to go down this path?
Too late, he's already down it. I"m calling him out on it.
| 221 |
gulfloafer Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:01:38pm |
Colin Powell lost all credibility with me when he endorsed Obama. How can he justify that endorsement? You can't tell me he didn't have the slightest inkling of Obama's ideological background. Seriously, Obama wrote two books (allegedly) spelling it out.
| 222 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:01:52pm |
re: #184 Sharmuta
An Unapologetic, Strong Nat'l Defense.
Reasonable taxes, I don't mind paying some taxes, but when you feel you have to make your taxable income fit under a cap, well...
Lowered business taxes. More business means more jobs means more taxpayers yadayadayada.
Public School choices. Have to somehow make them accountable. Yeah I know the Unions have it, but you've gotta fight.
Stay the hell out of my life, and my economic way, as much as possible.
For startrs.
| 223 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:02:51pm |
re: #214 NelsFree
1. Strong Defense.
2. Lower taxes.
3. Smaller Government.
4. Less interference in the Private Sector.
5. Removing retrictive regulations on small businesses.
6. Charity from the Private sector instead of Government.
7. Balanced Government budgets.
8. Paying down the National Debt.Want more?
Yes- I do want more. But not because I disagree with your list. I want more not even from you- I want more of this discussion. We need to have it, imo. Maybe some others will add to your list or create their own. Let's see what we get. (Oh- and +1)
| 224 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:03:19pm |
re: #187 Sharmuta
Because I'm pretty sure so-con, fisc-cons and security hawks would all give differing ideas on what "conservative" means.
And I'd agree with the last two of them.
| 225 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:03:36pm |
re: #201 Sharmuta
I think the key to the whole problem is, as Sowell wrote "Much of what the unconstrained vision sees as morally imperative to do, the constrained vision sees man as incapable of doing."
The very idea that there are challenges that are beyond our powers to solve is antithetical to the 'can do' spirit, and the idea that there are some gifts that Federal Government can't give is foreign to a lot of people with the 'do for me' habit. So there is a steep learning curve on both ends.
| 226 |
yesandno Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:03pm |
re: #202 Alouette
Operation Chaos was exactly the opposite. He urged people to vote for Hillary...even to send her money. It even narrowed the playing field. Unfortunately, it was too late after the first caucus...where the media told us that the vote in Iowa after the busloads of people were shuttled in, indicated Hillary was out and Obama in.
The history of all this will make an interesting read in 100 years...if they allow things like that then.
| 228 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:18pm |
LionofDixon: Did Colin Powell actively fight in a war against the United States?
You going to answer?
| 229 |
SpaceJesus Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:31pm |
re: #199 NelsFree
Unjustified accusation. ad hominem attack. Polarization.
Par for your course SJ.
the only explanation for Rush's behavior has to be drugs or mental sickness.
no sane and sober person would ever say the kind of ridiculous crap he says.
| 230 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:36pm |
re: #215 HoosierHoops
That turned into an American Traitor...Do you really want to go down this path?
What's going on here is that "the GOP" is being treated as "America", and any 'betrayal' of the GOP is being treated like it's a betrayal of America. This fits right in with years of calling liberals, democrats and anyone who questioned the war as 'unamerican' or 'treasonous'.
I know a lot of people like to say "The Constitution is not a suicide pact". Well, party affiliation isn't a suicide pact either. If a party can't criticise itself, how can it ever reform or be effective?
| 231 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:39pm |
re: #223 Sharmuta
Looks a lot like 222. I think we can ID some consensus items on the list already such as strong national defense, lowered taxes and smaller government with less spending.
| 232 |
Ojoe Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:04:47pm |
| 233 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:05:07pm |
Oh, I forgot. An ice cream store on every corner.
| 234 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:05:22pm |
re: #221 gulfloafer
Colin Powell lost all credibility with me when he endorsed Obama. How can he justify that endorsement? You can't tell me he didn't have the slightest inkling of Obama's ideological background. Seriously, Obama wrote two books (allegedly) spelling it out.
That's fair for you to feel...Let's leave skin color out of this...
| 235 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:05:41pm |
re: #191 HoosierHoops
We defend an ex-Army General.. Whom does not vote for His leader by the color of his skin...I don't care who he voted for...That is not the way the Army rolls...Because of that you think I'm a moonbat? I'm a fair man
Talk about his politics.agree or disagree..Leave his skin color out of it...
Honest question, why do you think he endorsed and worked for Obama's election?
My personal belief is that Powel is on the right on fiscal and defense matters, but not color blind - he is a human being. I think he weighed an equation which balanced the perceived limited damage Obama would do to the economy and the military against a giant leap forward socially with the election of a black man. Just my opinion of course, but I am open to other takes on his move to the other side of the aisle.
| 236 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:05:42pm |
Well I think the Republican "leadership" that Powell speaks of are afraid of SoCons.
Ronald Reagan came up with the 11th commandment - thou shall not speak ill of another Republican. Well the SoCons love that one so much that when any non-SoCon Republicans tried to engage them on issues, the SoCons would exclaim "11th commandment!" Then they came up with "RINO" - a name that implies a breach of the 11th commandment with its use, but never mind that conundrum.
The Republican Party is now about purity. Are you pure? Because if you aren't you aren't welcome.
Big Tent My Ass.
| 237 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:05:46pm |
re: #205 Thanos
Hoosier said "we defend ex-Army Generals..." without qualification or caveat. Thus, my analogy does work.
I suppose he would also support Maj. Gen. Carol Dean Childers' support and joinder in the lawsuit claiming that Obama has not proven himself to be fit to be CINC because of the birth certificate...
Not my words...Hoosiers'...
| 238 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:06:02pm |
re: #229 SpaceJesus
the only explanation for Rush's behavior has to be drugs or mental sickness.
no sane and sober person would ever say the kind of ridiculous crap he says.
From personal experience?
| 239 |
Duane Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:06:37pm |
re: #173 TheMatrix31
Conservatism is personal responsibility vs Liberalism's having the government to protect you from the consequences of your bad decisions. No, Bush was not a conservative.
| 240 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:06:41pm |
re: #236 karmic_inquisitor
Well I think the Republican "leadership" that Powell speaks of are afraid of SoCons.
Ronald Reagan came up with the 11th commandment - thou shall not speak ill of another Republican. Well the SoCons love that one so much that when any non-SoCon Republicans tried to engage them on issues, the SoCons would exclaim "11th commandment!" Then they came up with "RINO" - a name that implies a breach of the 11th commandment with its use, but never mind that conundrum.
The Republican Party is now about purity. Are you pure? Because if you aren't you aren't welcome.
Big Tent My Ass.
Toomey and Rush threw that out the window in 2005, thinks have gone to hell since then.
| 241 |
sngnsgt Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:06:55pm |
re: #219 horse
You think using the term "oreo" as he recently did is not ala Jon Stewart?
I thought Jon Stewart was just a hack comedian until he opened his political mouth. Now, I really know he's a comedian.
| 242 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:07:16pm |
re: #230 iceweasel
So taking advice from somebody who announced their endorsement for an inexperienced left-wing presidential candidate benefits the GOP how, exactly?
| 243 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:07:40pm |
re: #237 LionOfDixon
Hoosier said "we defend ex-Army Generals..." without qualification or caveat. Thus, my analogy does work.
I suppose he would also support Maj. Gen. Carol Dean Childers' support and joinder in the lawsuit claiming that Obama has not proven himself to be fit to be CINC because of the birth certificate...
Not my words...Hoosiers'...
No it doesn't unless you are calling Colin Powell a traitor, or just being a childish nit picker. Which is it?
| 244 |
flyovercountry Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:07:51pm |
Re: #7 Killgore Trout
He's right.
I'm sorry Mr. Trout, but I must disagree. While I don't always agree with Rush, I will say that he is guided solely by his convictions. His stances on issues has not wavered at any point in time. There are even a lot of things which I find objectionable. That being said, I can find nothing which reconciles General Powell's past with his current endorsement for this President. I am left with the only possible explanations being a psychotic break, or a complete sell out of his values for some other reason. General Powell is being totally dishonest intellectually, when he states that he is still a Republican.
The only reason republicans have lost so much recently is this steady march to become the Democrat Lite Party. Powell needs to be ignored.
| 245 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:07:54pm |
re: #195 jcm
Justice, equality of outcome.
“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
Alexis de TocquevilleSubstitute "progressive" for "socialism."
I'll go ahead and respond to that dangling pilpul. One of the basic concepts of this country, as embodied in the Preamble, is to "provide for the common good". You can quibble about what that means, but it is a flat out "socialistic" statement inserted by the founders with their eyes wide open. One of the primary arguments between Liberals and Conservatives ever since is to determine where the balance between regulation and capitalism lies in direct relation to that statement. Do you want to privatize your police department? Your fire department? Your drinking water department? Your sewerage board? I will bet you don't, but those are *all* socialist organizations.
I tend more to the Liberal side of things, but certainly not in all areas. I'm a vet. My dad's in Arlington. I come from a long line of public service. I think that in a nation as fruitful as ours, we should do what we can to ensure that people have the basics of food, housing, education, and medical care. The reason that I believe this is that it is cheaper, in the long run, than having them in prison, or in emergency rooms.
Just my .02
| 246 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:08:03pm |
re: #225 jaunte
to this end, we need to be able to talk through issues such as personal responsibility and accountability.
| 247 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:08:19pm |
re: #212 Tarkus289
Benedict Arnold was a patriot in the beginning, but for reasons due to treatment he flipped.
His wife had a taste for the good life by the way. Just say'n
| 248 |
rumcrook Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:08:45pm |
re: #242 Fenway_Nation
So taking advice from somebody who announced their endorsement for an inexperienced left-wing presidential candidate benefits the GOP how, exactly?
yeah I want to know the answer to that too.
| 249 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:09:27pm |
re: #223 Sharmuta
Yes- I do want more. But not because I disagree with your list. I want more not even from you- I want more of this discussion. We need to have it, imo. Maybe some others will add to your list or create their own. Let's see what we get. (Oh- and +1)
Another is very tough immigration policy. I don't know how to do it, but I really think something needs to be done about this. It's bad, especially in California. Violence is increasing too, especially with the drug stuff going on around the border. Just not a good situation.
I just want someone who has the testicles to do things right instead of whats popular. In that respect, I loved President Bush for a lot of things. Ironically, he was too soft on immigration in my opinion.
| 250 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:09:45pm |
re: #232 Ojoe
More:
Encouragement given to personal responsibility
Duty.
A forgotten word.
A duty to ones country, to contribute to the best of ones ability, to be informed and contribute to the political discourse. A duty to ones family, to provide and raise children to be dutiful citizens. A duty to ones community, not degrade and destroy but to build. A duty to uphold oaths taken, whether from the handshake with a neighbor or a oath of office.
In the words of Robert E. Lee, "duty is the most sublime word in the English language."
| 251 |
ladycatnip Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:09:55pm |
Anyone see this video of Crowley's fellow officers? The African-American female cop was powerful - we could definitely say she "spoke truth to power!" Articulate and to the point, she said she supported Obama in the last election and voted for him, but will not vote for him again. Wow.
| 252 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:07pm |
re: #208 Salamantis
This is precisely the kinda thing that Powell is talking about. The more the dittohead defenders in here berate the least little criticism of their Limbaugh demigod, the more they prove Powell's point. And they are completely clueless that they are proving the very point that they are inveiging against.
/laughing through my tears at irony thick as treacle
Well, wipe off those treacly tears, old boy! I am a regular listener of Rush, not a supporter. He has been shown to be right about his predictions many, many times. I am not 'berating' anyone who criticizes him. I am asking for references and facts to support their positions. "He's a drug addict" "He's a loon" These are statements advanced by critics. I have said he has a company verify the accuracy of his statements, which no one else does (to my knowledge). I believe this 'berating' amounts to no more than hyperbole on the part of the typer.
| 253 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:10pm |
re: #226 yesandno
Operation Chaos was exactly the opposite. He urged people to vote for Hillary...even to send her money. It even narrowed the playing field. Unfortunately, it was too late after the first caucus...where the media told us that the vote in Iowa after the busloads of people were shuttled in, indicated Hillary was out and Obama in.
The history of all this will make an interesting read in 100 years...if they allow things like that then.
the purpose of "Operation Chaos" was to make the Dems eat each other alive.
| 254 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:18pm |
re: #223 Sharmuta
Yes- I do want more. But not because I disagree with your list. I want more not even from you- I want more of this discussion. We need to have it, imo. Maybe some others will add to your list or create their own. Let's see what we get. (Oh- and +1)
Less interference in and penalizing for individual citizens' life orientations or decisions (abortion, homosexuality.
A commitment not to skew public school science education to pander to religious fundamentalists.
| 255 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:31pm |
re: #250 jcm
Duty.
A forgotten word.
A duty to ones country, to contribute to the best of ones ability, to be informed and contribute to the political discourse. A duty to ones family, to provide and raise children to be dutiful citizens. A duty to ones community, not degrade and destroy but to build. A duty to uphold oaths taken, whether from the handshake with a neighbor or a oath of office.
In the words of Robert E. Lee, "duty is the most sublime word in the English language."
++++++++
| 256 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:55pm |
re: #242 Fenway_Nation
So taking advice from somebody who announced their endorsement for an inexperienced left-wing presidential candidate benefits the GOP how, exactly?
I have a strong feeling that if this same advice came from a staunch conservative you'd still ignore it. The word "RINO" might even factor into the conversation.
| 257 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:10:58pm |
re: #249 TheMatrix31
this is another subject that needs to be discussed openly and honestly without dancing around issues for fear of being labeled racist. Of course, this means the discussion must revolve around facts and not racist rhetoric.
| 258 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:11:26pm |
re: #244 flyovercountry
Re: #7 Killgore Trout
I'm sorry Mr. Trout, but I must disagree. While I don't always agree with Rush, I will say that he is guided solely by his convictions. His stances on issues has not wavered at any point in time. There are even a lot of things which I find objectionable. That being said, I can find nothing which reconciles General Powell's past with his current endorsement for this President. I am left with the only possible explanations being a psychotic break, or a complete sell out of his values for some other reason. General Powell is being totally dishonest intellectually, when he states that he is still a Republican.
The only reason republicans have lost so much recently is this steady march to become the Democrat Lite Party. Powell needs to be ignored.
Heh. You called him Mr. Trout.
| 259 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:11:30pm |
re: #225 jaunte
I think the key to the whole problem is, as Sowell wrote "Much of what the unconstrained vision sees as morally imperative to do, the constrained vision sees man as incapable of doing."
The very idea that there are challenges that are beyond our powers to solve is antithetical to the 'can do' spirit, and the idea that there are some gifts that Federal Government can't give is foreign to a lot of people with the 'do for me' habit. So there is a steep learning curve on both ends.
My Friend- I think the starting point would be for folks to articulate what they think is the proper role and scope of government. If one thinks it is government's job to improve the people instead of it being their job to keep society functioning as best as possible- then the dividing line becomes clear.
| 260 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:11:56pm |
re: #251 ladycatnip
I did last night.
I see the policewoman being portrayed by Angela Basset when the movie version of all this comes out.
/
| 261 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:12:17pm |
re: #242 Fenway_Nation
So taking advice from somebody who announced their endorsement for an inexperienced left-wing presidential candidate benefits the GOP how, exactly?
What, you want him to wander the wilderness forever with a sign hung around his neck saying "I voted for Obama"?
I think it's a sad day when someone like Powell is being called a traitor and a RINO. It's generally a good idea for a party that's suffered a resounding electoral defeat to increase their appeal and their base-- not shrink it.
| 262 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:12:31pm |
re: #243 Thanos
I assume that Hoosier can defend his own choice of words. He stated emphatically that all ex-army Generals were to be defended...
Thus, I assume that in addition to my point above about Gen. Childers, Hoosier (and by proxy you) will also support and defend anything and everything that Wesley Clark happens to say.
Any overly broad and encompassing statement such as "we defend all ex-Army Generals" is easily open to a reductio ad absurdum...which is simply what I was using to point out the fallacy of the argument.
| 263 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:12:52pm |
I am a FRINO.
Former Republican In Name Only.
Don't be fooled - the current effort to retake power on fiscal conservatism is simply a side show. These guys wouldn't listen to the fiscal conservatives when they held the keys to the Senate, the House and the White House.
The only thing that really blows them away about Obama's spending is that they didn't think to try it themselves. Doubling the national debt in a couple of years is a mind blower, but there it is.
These clowns will get back into office and you will have the same crew talking fiscal conservatism as they simply move the accounts arround to reward their pals.
We need a new crew. New blood. In either party - don't care. This is like having a craving for Sushi and your only choices are Burger King and McDonalds.
| 264 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:13:09pm |
re: #223 Sharmuta
Yes- I do want more. But not because I disagree with your list. I want more not even from you- I want more of this discussion. We need to have it, imo. Maybe some others will add to your list or create their own. Let's see what we get. (Oh- and +1)
Shucks, I bet we could start a thread simply on which Federal Agencies could be eliminated! Charles?
| 266 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:14:00pm |
re: #256 Bloodnok
I tend to deduct creditiblity from anybody who though preisdent Barak Hussein 0bama wouldn've made a good president.
And frankly, any 'conservative' who voted for 0bama is either too stupid to be taken seriously, a liar or just not paying attention.
| 267 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:14:46pm |
re: #237 LionOfDixon
Hoosier said "we defend ex-Army Generals..." without qualification or caveat. Thus, my analogy does work.
I suppose he would also support Maj. Gen. Carol Dean Childers' support and joinder in the lawsuit claiming that Obama has not proven himself to be fit to be CINC because of the birth certificate...
Not my words...Hoosiers'...
Don't try to twist this ok?
I support free speech for ALL Americans.. I don't give a fuck how crazy it is. So don't ever try to twist what I post...Please..
Click my Avatar..1st platoon will kill any foe that would deny an American the right to free speech... My family and I are patriots...
I'm sorry General Powell voted for Obama..Boo fucking hoo
| 268 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:15:01pm |
re: #245 austin_blue
I'll go ahead and respond to that dangling pilpul. One of the basic concepts of this country, as embodied in the Preamble, is to "provide for the common good". You can quibble about what that means, but it is a flat out "socialistic" statement inserted by the founders with their eyes wide open. One of the primary arguments between Liberals and Conservatives ever since is to determine where the balance between regulation and capitalism lies in direct relation to that statement. Do you want to privatize your police department? Your fire department? Your drinking water department? Your sewerage board? I will bet you don't, but those are *all* socialist organizations.
I tend more to the Liberal side of things, but certainly not in all areas. I'm a vet. My dad's in Arlington. I come from a long line of public service. I think that in a nation as fruitful as ours, we should do what we can to ensure that people have the basics of food, housing, education, and medical care. The reason that I believe this is that it is cheaper, in the long run, than having them in prison, or in emergency rooms.
Just my .02
They are not national, they are local boards by in large. They are not socialist in the definition de Tocqueville and you are being disingenuous to suggest so.
Common good is just that, COMMON, it benefits ALL EQUALY. A highway system benefits everyone, so do National Parks. Common Good IS NOT, taking from one and giving to another.
How is it the COMMON GOOD to take a dollar out of a community give it to the Federal Government and get 35¢ back for the local school, along with over arching Federal regulations in direct contravention of the 10th Amendment?
| 269 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:15:19pm |
re: #259 Sharmuta
I think you just hit the differentiator between libs and conservatives. Government ISN'T in the business of making people's lives better, it is to keep society functioning. The includes ensuring everyone can pursue "happiness", but not supplying the happiness for them.
| 270 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:15:19pm |
re: #259 Sharmuta
My Friend- I think the starting point would be for folks to articulate what they think is the proper role and scope of government. If one thinks it is government's job to improve the people instead of it being their job to keep society functioning as best as possible- then the dividing line becomes clear.
I'm assuming you mean federal gov't
If so,,, protect the borders and mediate disputes between states
Except for keeping up the "Eisenhower Highway System", I think that about covers it!
| 271 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:16:11pm |
re: #254 Salamantis
Less interference in and penalizing for individual citizens' life orientations or decisions (abortion, homosexuality).
This would mean an end to federally funded abortions, and elimination of any laws catering to those behaviors.
A commitment not to skew public school science education to pander to religious fundamentalists.
Why stop there? Privatization of education, paid for with State-only vouchers. No Federal funds for state schools, no reallocation of other state's money.
| 272 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:16:25pm |
re: #264 NelsFree
Shucks, I bet we could start a thread simply on which Federal Agencies could be eliminated! Charles?
Time and bandwidth constraints demand we limit it to the ones that should be KEPT!
| 273 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:16:25pm |
re: #253 Alouette
the purpose of "Operation Chaos" was to make the Dems eat each other alive.
The result of Operations Chaos, in so far as it had one, was help the media keep covering the Democratic primary and pretending Hillary still had a chance, long after it was clear she didn't.
Consequently Obama got lots more coverage and exposure and lots more practice in debates, etc, long before he ever had to take on McCain.
Then the media myth (and republican fantasy) of all those angry Hillary voters who would never ever vote for Obama probably also influenced McCain's pick of Palin.
Now that I think about it, maybe Rush actually is a secret Obama supporter bent on destroying the GOP. It certainly would explain a lot.
We're through the looking-glass, people!
| 274 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:16:26pm |
re: #261 iceweasel
Oh...if I want a formation of Soviet Bloc tanks and armour reduced to molten scrap metal, Powell is one of the first people I'd go to.
But when it comes to politics...I have zero reason to take him seriously.
And here's the kicker- I didn't need Rush Limbaugh to tell me that. I figured that one out all by my lonesome.
| 275 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:16:57pm |
If Powell is a Republican, then Zel Miller is a Democrat.
| 276 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:03pm |
| 277 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:25pm |
re: #252 NelsFree
Well, wipe off those treacly tears, old boy! I am a regular listener of Rush, not a supporter. He has been shown to be right about his predictions many, many times. I am not 'berating' anyone who criticizes him. I am asking for references and facts to support their positions. "He's a drug addict" "He's a loon" These are statements advanced by critics. I have said he has a company verify the accuracy of his statements, which no one else does (to my knowledge). I believe this 'berating' amounts to no more than hyperbole on the part of the typer.
Why didn't you reply to me when you asked me for evidence that Michael Steele had been politically castrated into abject apology for daring to criticize Lord Limbaugh, and I provided it?
Steele to Rush: I'm Sorry
[Link: www.politico.com...]
| 278 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:37pm |
re: #262 LionOfDixon
So you are backing off to being a childish nit picker.
| 279 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:37pm |
re: #257 ArmyWife
this is another subject that needs to be discussed openly and honestly without dancing around issues for fear of being labeled racist. Of course, this means the discussion must revolve around facts and not racist rhetoric.
I also want someone to just come out and hold a press conference saying;
"Look, what I'm going to say, in NO WAY has ANY racial bent. For the love of God, please drop this race issue, because it has NOTHING to do with what I'm about to say"
Then carry on about immigration, or other problems that end up being contorted into some racial bullshit that annoys everyone to the point of not even caring about the main issue anymore.
| 280 |
Racer X Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:41pm |
re: #251 ladycatnip
Anyone see this video of Crowley's fellow officers? The African-American female cop was powerful - we could definitely say she "spoke truth to power!" Articulate and to the point, she said she supported Obama in the last election and voted for him, but will not vote for him again. Wow.
Very powerful video clip.
| 281 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:17:54pm |
re: #267 HoosierHoops
I too am a patriot and a decorated vet. I was not twisting your words. Only trying to make the point that flag rank and retired status do not automatically garner full support for whatever the retired star has to say. That's all.
| 282 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:18:00pm |
re: #221 gulfloafer
Colin Powell lost all credibility with me when he endorsed Obama. How can he justify that endorsement? You can't tell me he didn't have the slightest inkling of Obama's ideological background. Seriously, Obama wrote two books (allegedly) spelling it out.
He gave a few interviews on the topic. There's no need for it to be a mystery to you. Goggle and you shall find.
| 283 |
FrogMarch Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:18:17pm |
Oh brother.
Colin and Rush can't stand each other. So they exchange barbs. Free speech is a bitch. If the R's are afraid of Rush, then well - they are wimps. And some of them are wimps. I doubt most R's have time to listen to Rush's show.
| 284 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:18:26pm |
re: #269 ArmyWife
I think you just hit the differentiator between libs and conservatives. Government ISN'T in the business of making people's lives better, it is to keep society functioning. The includes ensuring everyone can pursue "happiness", but not supplying the happiness for them.
Life is unfair sometimes.
And sometimes a person is his own worst enemy.
Government is NOT the great equalizer or the saviour.
No matter how much we've been hearing it is lately.
| 285 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:18:33pm |
re: #263 karmic_inquisitor
I am a FRINO.
Former Republican In Name Only.
Don't be fooled - the current effort to retake power on fiscal conservatism is simply a side show. These guys wouldn't listen to the fiscal conservatives when they held the keys to the Senate, the House and the White House.
The only thing that really blows them away about Obama's spending is that they didn't think to try it themselves. Doubling the national debt in a couple of years is a mind blower, but there it is.
These clowns will get back into office and you will have the same crew talking fiscal conservatism as they simply move the accounts arround to reward their pals.
We need a new crew. New blood. In either party - don't care. This is like having a craving for Sushi and your only choices are Burger King and McDonalds.
This is why I favor the Balanced Budget Amendment. It would really separate the wheat from the chaff. If a conservative can't support it, then I question their fiscal responsibility credentials.
To me- a "RINO" is someone who spends money like a democrat. Since Newt was kicked from office, we've had nothing but RINOs losing us elections while conservatives stay home.
| 286 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:18:43pm |
re: #281 LionOfDixon
I too am a patriot and a decorated vet. I was not twisting your words. Only trying to make the point that flag rank and retired status do not automatically garner full support for whatever the retired star has to say. That's all.
Yeah, and you went right to benedict. Nice. I think I know where you are coming from.
| 287 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:19:02pm |
re: #278 Thanos
Please respond logically, rather than by ad hominen attack. Your attempted arguments will then at least have some merit. Thank you.
| 288 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:19:30pm |
Cool fact,
The Eisenhower Highway System incorporates a one mile straight run every five miles to be used as an airstrip during wartime.
| 289 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:19:32pm |
| 290 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:19:51pm |
re: #281 LionOfDixon
I too am a patriot and a decorated vet. I was not twisting your words. Only trying to make the point that flag rank and retired status do not automatically garner full support for whatever the retired star has to say. That's all.
OK cool...My blood pressure is dropping like a rock.. Thank you for your service to our country sir
*salute*
| 291 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:20:13pm |
re: #287 LionOfDixon
Please respond logically, rather than by ad hominen attack. Your attempted arguments will then at least have some merit. Thank you.
Hey, you made the comparison of Powell and Arnold, if you can't freaking take it then don't dish it buddy.
| 292 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:20:52pm |
re: #289 Thanos
Some good news among the gloom:
Obama dips again
[Link: www.gallup.com...]
WHY DO YOU WANT 0BAMA TO FAIL!!!???
//
| 293 |
CynicalConservative Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:20:53pm |
re: #289 Thanos
Some good news among the gloom:
Obama dips again
[Link: www.gallup.com...]
Paging avanti...
| 294 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:21:06pm |
re: #269 ArmyWife
I think you just hit the differentiator between libs and conservatives. Government ISN'T in the business of making people's lives better, it is to keep society functioning. The includes ensuring everyone can pursue "happiness", but not supplying the happiness for them.
I'd like to agree with you, but that mindset isn't exclusive to the left. Plenty of those on the right want to push a different variety of what they think is good for us- and that's where the creationists enter the picture.
| 295 |
CommonCents Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:21:10pm |
Gen. Powell has done far more for this country than I, and with that I will not criticize the person. I don't agree with his current politics. If he claims inside knowledge of conservative leaders he needs to name names and not just drop innuendo on a lefty 'news' show.
| 296 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:21:49pm |
re: #245 austin_blue
I'll go ahead and respond to that dangling pilpul. One of the basic concepts of this country, as embodied in the Preamble, is to "provide for the common good". You can quibble about what that means, but it is a flat out "socialistic" statement inserted by the founders with their eyes wide open.
The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"
You have misquoted the Preamble. Shame on you. Your argument withers on the Vine of Wrong Quotes.
| 297 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:21:53pm |
re: #289 Thanos
Some good news among the gloom:
Obama dips again
[Link: www.gallup.com...]
To quote the Great Jerry Seinfeld...
"Thaaat's a shame."
| 298 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:21:59pm |
re: #292 Fenway_Nation
WHY DO YOU WANT 0BAMA TO FAIL!!!???
//
I don't want him to fail, the countries doing bad enough, but he is failing. I think I've been clear on that.
| 299 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:22:07pm |
re: #288 Tarkus289
I actually heard that somewhere before- but what I'd like to know is if the same standard is still being used when new freeways/expressways are being built.
| 300 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:22:34pm |
re: #268 jcm
They are not national, they are local boards by in large. They are not socialist in the definition de Tocqueville and you are being disingenuous to suggest so.
Common good is just that, COMMON, it benefits ALL EQUALY. A highway system benefits everyone, so do National Parks. Common Good IS NOT, taking from one and giving to another.
How is it the COMMON GOOD to take a dollar out of a community give it to the Federal Government and get 35¢ back for the local school, along with over arching Federal regulations in direct contravention of the 10th Amendment?
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.
And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation? Local utilities and emergency services are paid by the citizens. They are not privatized organizations. They are socialist by definition. Sheesh.
| 301 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:22:41pm |
re: #294 Sharmuta
I agree that there are those on the right who believe they know "best", but they don't seem to want the government to supply us with everything under the sun rather than work for it. Two separate issues, in my opinion.
| 302 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:22:42pm |
re: #289 Thanos
Some good news among the gloom:
Obama dips again
[Link: www.gallup.com...]
His 13% job approval among conservative Republicans seems high.
| 303 |
theheat Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:22:49pm |
re: #263 karmic_inquisitor
We need a new crew. New blood. In either party - don't care. This is like having a craving for Sushi and your only choices are Burger King and McDonalds.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Maybe a new party, called FISCOs? The Stop Spending Money We Ain't Got party, the Anti-Nanny State Party, the Stay Outta My Personal Life party, the party of Equal Opportunity, not Lowest Common Denominator. Yeah, that party.
While the left drags us into the abyss of socialism, the right argues about how old the earth is, and forms the morality police. And, face it, the right and left haven't been anything close to responsible when handed the checkbook. It's all bullshit. None of the pressing matters, things that matter to everyone, are being adequately addressed, and the country as a whole suffers.
| 304 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:23:24pm |
re: #294 Sharmuta
I'd like to agree with you, but that mindset isn't exclusive to the left. Plenty of those on the right want to push a different variety of what they think is good for us- and that's where the creationists enter the picture.
Not to mention corn syrup subsidies.
| 305 |
Kronocide Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:23:25pm |
He's a radio talk show host. If the GOP is askered of him, they're the problem, not Rush. Same with Powell: he's not the problem, he's a symptom.
The real subject is the GOP, not either of these two men.
| 306 |
kansas Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:23:55pm |
Limbaugh: Obama Laying Groundwork for Third Term
Looks to me like Obama is laying the groundwork to not have a second term.
| 307 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:06pm |
My better half is finally off work tonight, so I'm going to go frisk her for any unauthorized weaponry she might have brought in the house.
Nite.
| 308 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:09pm |
re: #271 NelsFree
Sal: Less interference in and penalizing for individual citizens' life orientations or decisions (abortion, homosexuality).
Nels: This would mean an end to federally funded abortions, and elimination of any laws catering to those behaviors.
It would also mean no laws forbidding them.
Sal: A commitment not to skew public school science education to pander to religious fundamentalists.
Nels: Why stop there? Privatization of education, paid for with State-only vouchers. No Federal funds for state schools, no reallocation of other state's money.
That's the fallback position of the Disco Institute; if they can't selectively subvert public school science education, they're willing to bring the entire public school system down, so their fundy creationist schools can take up the slack and brainwash them a whole crop of theocracy-friendly voters.
| 309 |
CommonCents Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:18pm |
re: #296 NelsFree
Head on the nail! Promoting the general welfare is very much different that providing the general welfare.
| 310 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:21pm |
re: #299 Fenway_Nation
Doubt it, but where I live the are many miles of interstate, and I can say for certain there are 1 mile "runways" all over the place, and around here most of the roads do not go in straight lines.
| 311 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:23pm |
re: #291 Thanos
If you are unfamiliar with logic and debating, I suggest you enlist the help of a good dictionary and/or encylcopedia for the use of reductio ad absurdum in debates. Otherwise, I am through with you and your name-calling.
| 312 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:44pm |
re: #302 jaunte
His 13% job approval among conservative Republicans seems high.
Last election would have been won by McCain / Palin without self declared conservatives crossing over last election.
| 313 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:24:48pm |
re: #302 jaunte
re: #289 Thanos
Some good news among the gloom:Obama dips again
[Link: www.gallup.com...]
His 13% job approval among conservative Republicans seems high.
Maybe they polled the Powell household.
/
| 315 |
Kronocide Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:25:30pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.
Huh? Even in context I don't understand what that means.
| 316 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:25:41pm |
re: #311 LionOfDixon
If you are unfamiliar with logic and debating, I suggest you enlist the help of a good dictionary and/or encylcopedia for the use of reductio ad absurdum in debates. Otherwise, I am through with you and your name-calling.
If you want to make comparisons to traitors own up to your words or eat them.
| 317 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:25:45pm |
re: #277 Salamantis
Why didn't you reply to me when you asked me for evidence that Michael Steele had been politically castrated into abject apology for daring to criticize Lord Limbaugh, and I provided it?
Steele to Rush: I'm Sorry
[Link: www.politico.com...]
Since you provided it, you answered my challenge. Thank you for your insightful research. Next time I have a beer, I shall share it with you.
Salamantis, are you related to the Geico Gecko?
| 318 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:26:02pm |
re: #295 CommonCents
Gen. Powell has done far more for this country than I, and with that I will not criticize the person. I don't agree with his current politics. If he claims inside knowledge of conservative leaders he needs to name names and not just drop innuendo on a lefty 'news' show.
Yup, if he has an axe to grind he needs to haul it out and start grinding. Sure beats this vague and snide approach to grievance he seems to be using.
| 319 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:26:40pm |
Good evening Lizards. Is spacefreak on liquid coke tonight? He is down dinging everything.
| 320 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:27:01pm |
re: #290 HoosierHoops
Thank you to you, as well for your service. Great photo, by the way. Reminds me of my service days...I have one on the wall from the early 80's...I had more hair and less gut back then.
| 321 |
theheat Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:27:26pm |
re: #319 Erik The Red
I dunno, but the nic sounds revealing ;-)
| 322 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:27:49pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation?
Austin, Austin! I believe you have not read his works. Perhaps you should, then you would understand.
| 323 |
CommonCents Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:27:50pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.
And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation? Local utilities and emergency services are paid by the citizens. They are not privatized organizations. They are socialist by definition. Sheesh.
I question your assertion that local utilities are "paid by the citizens" and "socialist organizations". A majority of utility companies are publicly traded entities that operate for profit, some regulated, some not.
| 324 |
ArmyWife Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:27:58pm |
As I must be at ye olde chemical plant in the morning, I am going to bid you all farewell. I fully expect you to have come to consensus on conservatism, and identified a suitable candidate by the time I return tomorrow evening. Good luck, the clock starts NOW!
| 325 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:07pm |
Spineless weasels afraid of a demagogue? That's unpossible.
| 326 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:17pm |
re: #319 Erik The Red
Good evening Lizards. Is spacefreak on liquid coke tonight? He is down dinging everything.
Good evening! Liquid coke? Is that like Coke Zero?
| 327 |
Ojoe Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:18pm |
re: #263 karmic_inquisitor
We need a new party in toto, not new blood in either of the two main existing parties, IMHO.
| 328 |
sattv4u2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:29pm |
re: #319 Erik The Red
Good evening Lizards. Is spacefreak on liquid coke tonight? He is down dinging everything.
He's in a foul mood. He just found out that there will be no more re-runs of Hee Haw
| 329 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:32pm |
re: #316 Thanos
Q.E.D. Case Closed. Defense Rests. Verdict for Lion of Dixon. Thank you Thanos, for proving my own argument.
| 330 |
loudguitars Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:28:42pm |
Ah, Colin Powell. A "Republican" and self proclaimed conservative who voted for and endorsed the most liberal President in American history over a moderate Republican like John McCain, and recently said (paraphrase) "Americans are generally in favor of higher taxes for increased services".
RINO.
I truly respect his service to his country, but politically he appears to have no core beliefs and appears to be promoting one thing, his career.
| 331 |
fizzlogic Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:29:11pm |
re: #143 AlouetteEvidently Rush hasn't felt the need to use a new playbook. For Rush and the rest of the "conservative" pundits it's all about dog whistles. Whatever fear and anger they cultivate will help rack up the sales of Snapple, Select Comfort beds, Allen Steaks or whatever they're peddling. Who cares if it took the Right over the cliff...they got theirs.
| 332 |
reine.de.tout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:29:16pm |
re: #158 Going_gone
What's with all the liberals and RINOs in here defending Colon Powell and attacking Rush? Sheesh, when did this place get taken over by moonbats?
You only just registered today.
How can you live with your holier-than-thou attitude?
| 333 |
Fenway_Nation Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:29:16pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
re: #268 jcm
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation? Local utilities and emergency services are paid by the citizens. They are not privatized organizations. They are socialist by definition. Sheesh.
So I'm a stockholder in a socialist enterprise then? Interesting.
/My 'socialist entity' closed the trading day down $0.22 a share.
| 334 |
jcm Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:29:40pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.
And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation? Local utilities and emergency services are paid by the citizens. They are not privatized organizations. They are socialist by definition. Sheesh.
They are locally controlled, accountable to the people.
That is not socialist, that's called consent of the governed and a Representative Republic.
Socialist is Obama telling me what tire pressure I should use, whether I should schedule a convention in Las Vegas, telling me to take a pill instead of get heart surgery.
You need to brush up on fundamental definitions of words.
| 335 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:29:41pm |
| 336 |
itellu3times Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:30:24pm |
| 337 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:30:31pm |
re: #312 Thanos
Last election would have been won by McCain / Palin without self declared conservatives crossing over last election.
Not sure about that at all. I think the moderate/independent/centrists voting for Obama was the deciding issue.
| 338 |
Ojoe Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:30:47pm |
re: #250 jcm
"On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my Country and to obey the Scout law, to help other people at all times, to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight."
We say that every week at the Scout meeting.
Unpopular squares that we are.
| 339 |
Korla Pundit Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:30:47pm |
You just trashed one of America's finest Generals and implied he was raciest and voting his skin color..
You have insulted America...The United States Army...And a fine man...
I think he voted for who ever he voted for with his personal principles.
I never said he was a racist. I said that he voted for Obama, just like a lot of others who call themselves "conservative," because Obama is black, and it's a "historic" Presidency, and it makes them feel good, like some kind of '60s throwback.
It was not based on any principles. Which ones? The redistributionist ones, or the Marxist ones, or the anti-capitalism ones? Maybe you mean the anti-American, pro-dictator, pro-Islamist, ally-trashing principles that Obama stands for? Please specify.
As for his military career, yes, that's all well and good. Benedict Arnold was one of the colonies' greatest war heroes, too. So what? It's irrelevant to the discussion. We're talking about the GOP. Not the General who set us up for Gulf War II.
| 340 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:30:52pm |
re: #317 NelsFree
Since you provided it, you answered my challenge. Thank you for your insightful research. Next time I have a beer, I shall share it with you.
Salamantis, are you related to the Geico Gecko?
Nope. Salamantis is a combination of salamander (a fire elemental) and mantissa, a hood worn by academics and clerics to signify achievement in learning. I invented it as a nick for myself during my divorce, and for me, it means Hee Hoo Has Learned By Being Burned.
| 341 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:31:03pm |
re: #285 Sharmuta
My experience in being called a RINO at different party events and once by Laura Ingraham when calling into her show is that RINO is someone who doesn't embrace the culture wars.
I don't want government to preserve cultures. I don't want it to protect cultures. I don't want it to promote cultures. And there is no mythical "way it was" that I want to go back to.
I am for an America of free, industrious individuals going full speed ahead. Safety net - yes. Nanny state - no.
| 342 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:31:20pm |
re: #320 LionOfDixon
Thank you to you, as well for your service. Great photo, by the way. Reminds me of my service days...I have one on the wall from the early 80's...I had more hair and less gut back then.
Regards...That is a pic of my son and his comrades in Arms in Iraq...3/5 the Marines... I'm just a proud pops
| 343 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:31:32pm |
re: #296 NelsFree
I'll go ahead and respond to that dangling pilpul. One of the basic concepts of this country, as embodied in the Preamble, is to "provide for the common good". You can quibble about what that means, but it is a flat out "socialistic" statement inserted by the founders with their eyes wide open.
The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"You have misquoted the Preamble. Shame on you. Your argument withers on the Vine of Wrong Quotes.
Here's the document, again. Take closer look at it. Do you think there is a difference between "welfare" and "good'?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Or do you think that that means that the country should provide "welfare" to the general population based on "strict interpretation"?
It's a slippery slope!
| 344 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:31:42pm |
Request Lizards. I want to listen to something load and hard. Ant suggestions? I am undecided.
| 345 |
Kronocide Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:32:49pm |
re: #344 Erik The Red
Request Lizards. I want to listen to something load and hard. Ant suggestions? I am undecided.
I'm in a Tool mood.
| 346 |
VioletTiger Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:32:54pm |
re: #245 austin_blue
I'll go ahead and respond to that dangling pilpul. One of the basic concepts of this country, as embodied in the Preamble, is to "provide for the common good". You can quibble about what that means, but it is a flat out "socialistic" statement inserted by the founders with their eyes wide open. One of the primary arguments between Liberals and Conservatives ever since is to determine where the balance between regulation and capitalism lies in direct relation to that statement. Do you want to privatize your police department? Your fire department? Your drinking water department? Your sewerage board? I will bet you don't, but those are *all* socialist organizations.
I tend more to the Liberal side of things, but certainly not in all areas. I'm a vet. My dad's in Arlington. I come from a long line of public service. I think that in a nation as fruitful as ours, we should do what we can to ensure that people have the basics of food, housing, education, and medical care. The reason that I believe this is that it is cheaper, in the long run, than having them in prison, or in emergency rooms.
Just my .02
Hey austin,
In your great state this week--too hot!
Perhaps these are rhetorical questions, but are food, housing, education and medical care rights? If so, who has to provide them? How much is basic? Do I have a right to a beach-front condo? If I am a doctor, am I obligated to treat you? Should this be out of the goodness of my heart or my government mandate?
I understand your points, but wonder where and how we draw the line between giving a hand up when somebody needs it, and letting people live off the fat of the land.
| 347 |
Randall Gross Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:33:24pm |
re: #337 iceweasel
Initial exit polling had more conservatives voting Obama than Liberals voting for McCain. I don't remember the exact numbers or percents, but it would have made the election a dead heat or win for McCain if they hadn't crossed over. It's a concern that they did, I'd love to know Powell's reasoning and theirs so we can make sure it doesn't happen in 2012.
| 348 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:33:32pm |
re: #315 BigPapa
Huh? Even in context I don't understand what that means.
The point was attempting to be made that some federal tax dollars were coming back to the taxed states at only 35 cents on the dollar.
| 349 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:33:33pm |
re: #344 Erik The Red
Request Lizards. I want to listen to something load and hard. Ant suggestions? I am undecided.
Playlists
I have one for about every mood...Spin it Dude!
| 350 |
CommonCents Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:34:12pm |
re: #337 iceweasel
Not sure about that at all. I think the moderate/independent/centrists voting for Obama was the deciding issue.
I think the gullible voters who refused to acknowledge Obama's past and believed his stump speech promises were the deciding votes, and that's an issue.
| 351 |
Ward Cleaver Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:34:30pm |
re: #192 horse
Yes it did, he emphasized the key issues of the time around liberty, freedom and getting government out of our lives during economically challenging times. The social con issues were back burner, where they belong, and there was no populist bs. I agree, the real deal politician pushing this message and approach could work again, but they can not stray into the social con and populist mine fields.
But Reagan was also strongly pro-life.
| 352 |
reine.de.tout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:34:35pm |
re: #301 ArmyWife
I agree that there are those on the right who believe they know "best", but they don't seem to want the government to supply us with everything under the sun rather than work for it. Two separate issues, in my opinion.
Yes, upding upding upding.
| 353 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:34:39pm |
re: #301 ArmyWife
I agree that there are those on the right who believe they know "best", but they don't seem to want the government to supply us with everything under the sun rather than work for it. Two separate issues, in my opinion.
I again can't agree with you. The dichotomy I presented earlier was that of the two visions. The constrained vision would think it's government's job to keep society running as smoothly as possible , while the unconstrained vision thinks government should improve society.
Religious fundamentalists are of the unconstrained vision.
To learn more about this fascinating topic, I recommend A Conflict of Visions by Dr. Thomas Sowell.
| 354 |
Targetpractice Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:35:41pm |
I gotta say, this is fucking sad, that first instinct of some is not to ask whether the man has a point, but to instead immediately dismiss anything he says simply because of who he endorsed in the last election. I listen to Rush on occasion and I agree with a lot of what he says, but I can also agree that the GOP is scared of the man. Or, rather, they're scared of his listeners and there threats to withhold campaign donations. I'm sorry, but when's the last time that you saw a Democrat drop a brick and beg forgiveness from Olbermann?
Seriously, if the Party cannot speak against Rush Limbaugh without fear that they're gonna be tarred and feathered, how am I to expect them to stand up to Nancy or Harry on the Hill?
| 355 |
CommonCents Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:35:53pm |
re: #343 austin_blue
Here's the document, again. Take closer look at it. Do you think there is a difference between "welfare" and "good'?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Or do you think that that means that the country should provide "welfare" to the general population based on "strict interpretation"?
It's a slippery slope!
The difference isn't between "welfare" and "good". The difference is between "provide" and "promote". You should listen to your own advice and read closer.
| 356 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:35:57pm |
re: #308 Salamantis
That's the fallback position of the Disco Institute; if they can't selectively subvert public school science education, they're willing to bring the entire public school system down, so their fundy creationist schools can take up the slack and brainwash them a whole crop of theocracy-friendly voters.
Sal, I think you've drawn a Target on my Avatar tonight. Fortunately for me, I shop at Kohl's.
My children attend a private school. It does not teach Creationism, although it was founded as a religious school. Private school does not connote Theocratic schooling. Please remove your blinders, they are also deflecting the sound from YouTube videos, like this one:
| 358 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:36:22pm |
| 359 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:36:40pm |
re: #354 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
I gotta say, this is fucking sad, that first instinct of some is not to ask whether the man has a point, but to instead immediately dismiss anything he says simply because of who he endorsed in the last election. I listen to Rush on occasion and I agree with a lot of what he says, but I can also agree that the GOP is scared of the man. Or, rather, they're scared of his listeners and there threats to withhold campaign donations. I'm sorry, but when's the last time that you saw a Democrat drop a brick and beg forgiveness from Olbermann?
Seriously, if the Party cannot speak against Rush Limbaugh without fear that they're gonna be tarred and feathered, how am I to expect them to stand up to Nancy or Harry on the Hill?
Excellent post.
| 360 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:03pm |
re: #324 ArmyWife
As I must be at ye olde chemical plant in the morning, I am going to bid you all farewell. I fully expect you to have come to consensus on conservatism, and identified a suitable candidate by the time I return tomorrow evening. Good luck, the clock starts NOW!
Stop the Clock!
Sarah Palin!
| 361 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:14pm |
re: #341 karmic_inquisitor
My experience in being called a RINO at different party events and once by Laura Ingraham when calling into her show is that RINO is someone who doesn't embrace the culture wars.
I don't want government to preserve cultures. I don't want it to protect cultures. I don't want it to promote cultures. And there is no mythical "way it was" that I want to go back to.
I am for an America of free, industrious individuals going full speed ahead. Safety net - yes. Nanny state - no.
You know I agree with you, and this is another reason why I keep saying we need to define "conservatism". I know what I think it means, and it's different then what the people you're describing mean. If it gets decided that "conservatism" is social in nature, I'd like to know so I can find something else to call myself.
| 362 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:24pm |
re: #353 Sharmuta
I again can't agree with you. The dichotomy I presented earlier was that of the two visions. The constrained vision would think it's government's job to keep society running as smoothly as possible , while the unconstrained vision thinks government should improve society.
Religious fundamentalists are of the unconstrained vision.
To learn more about this fascinating topic, I recommend A Conflict of Visions by Dr. Thomas Sowell.
I used to read Sowell some over at creators.com
He is thick read...Hard for me to read...He is a genius
| 363 |
Kronocide Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:35pm |
re: #354 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
TP, well said. On that note I will escape with Mrs BP to the movies.
| 364 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:36pm |
re: #344 Erik The Red
Primus!
| 365 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:37:53pm |
| 366 |
VioletTiger Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:38:14pm |
re: #284 SasquatchOnSteroids
Life is unfair sometimes.
And sometimes a person is his own worst enemy.
Government is NOT the great equalizer or the saviour.
No matter how much we've been hearing it is lately.
Liberals hate unequal outcomes. They can't stand when one kid wins a trophy and the others don't or when one guy makes a fortune and the rest of us don't. Hence they see government as that great equalizer, ready to right the wrong of somebody's hard work or pdl.
| 368 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:39:34pm |
re: #364 Killgore Trout
Embed disabled but SOOO worth the double click.
| 369 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:40:13pm |
re: #346 VioletTiger
Hey austin,
In your great state this week--too hot!
Perhaps these are rhetorical questions, but are food, housing, education and medical care rights? If so, who has to provide them? How much is basic? Do I have a right to a beach-front condo? If I am a doctor, am I obligated to treat you? Should this be out of the goodness of my heart or my government mandate?
I understand your points, but wonder where and how we draw the line between giving a hand up when somebody needs it, and letting people live off the fat of the land.
Actually, you are required to treat me if you are a doctor. Here in central Texas, we had to establish a taxing district to collect money to pay for emergency room costs incurred at our various area hospitals. They are hellacious compared to any insurance plan. As far as housing is concerned, you should familiarize yourself with the Section 8 housing program administered by HUD. And no, you really, really wouldn't want to live in public housing.
| 370 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:40:32pm |
re: #356 NelsFree
Sal, I think you've drawn a Target on my Avatar tonight. Fortunately for me, I shop at Kohl's.
My children attend a private school. It does not teach Creationism, although it was founded as a religious school. Private school does not connote Theocratic schooling. Please remove your blinders, they are also deflecting the sound from YouTube videos, like this one:
The Southern Baptists and the Assembly of God-ers and the Church of the Nazarenists are all creationist, and would be only too happy to open beaucoup schools to take up the slack of the closing down of the publlic school system and undercut their competition just so long as they can also indoctrinate the kids they get, and get their tithes rolling in once they graduate and get employed.
| 371 |
Dan G. Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:40:33pm |
| 372 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:40:39pm |
re: #368 Sharmuta
Damn, I keep forgetting to preview.
| 373 |
MrPaulRevere Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:41:05pm |
A political party that does not listen to the concerns of the middle class is a party out of power, period. Correctly or incorrectly, the GOP was perceived as tone deaf to the concerns of the middle class. Their message to the unemployed was 'create your own job'. Their message to those concerned about rising health care costs was 'get a second job'. The public tuned that nonsense out, as they should have.
| 374 |
MandyManners Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:41:10pm |
re: #344 Erik The Red
Request Lizards. I want to listen to something load and hard. Ant suggestions? I am undecided.
| 376 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:42:12pm |
re: #372 Killgore Trout
Over on the right hand side is a couple of boxes where the up-loader's info is. The give the URL and Embed, and it will tell you if the video's disabled or not.
| 377 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:42:34pm |
re: #300 austin_blue
Well, if someone is getting .35 cents on the dollar, someone else is getting a shitpot more, aren't they? That's politics, my man.
And to your other point, who the heck made de Tocqueville God? Why does a dead Frenchman become the arbiter of the conversation? Local utilities and emergency services are paid by the citizens. They are not privatized organizations. They are socialist by definition. Sheesh.
Of course, Tom Paine is the original secular progressive.
[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...]
"Do you like estate taxes? Paine was pitching them in 1791.
How about progressive taxation? Paine wasn't just for it, he made charts and graphs.
Welfare? Absolutely.
Government make-work programs? Yep. Pay for them with the estate tax.
Public education? Yes, please.
International organizations? Paine said we needed them. Thought they might be useful for preventing wars after we disarmed.
Feminism?
If a woman were to defend the cause of her sex, she might address him in the following manner ... If we have an equal right with you to virtue, why should we not have an equal right to praise? ... Our duties are different from yours, but they are not therefore less difficult to fulfill, or of less consequence to society ... You cannot be ignorant that we have need of courage not less than you ... Permit our names to be sometimes pronounced beyond the narrow circle in which we live. Permit friendship, or at least love, to inscribe its emblem on the tomb where our ashes repose; and deny us not that public esteem which, after the esteem of one's self, is the sweetest reward of well doing. -- T. Paine
"
And here's his view on the government and charities, from Agrarian Justice:
There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pulleys, that the whole weight of misery can be removed.
The plan here proposed will reach the whole. It will immediately relieve and take out of view three classes of wretchedness-the blind, the lame, and the aged poor; and it will furnish the rising generation with means to prevent their becoming poor; and it will do this without deranging or interfering with any national measures.
| 378 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:43:07pm |
| 379 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:43:26pm |
Oh dear, I must stop typing and get some rest. Tomorrow will be a long day. Thank you all for the enjoyable exchange of ideas, opinions, and rank denouncements. With that in mind, My Three Affectations:
Cathypop: "you like me! you really like me!" {Cathypop} "do I get a picture?"
Salamantis: "I just saved 15% or more on my car insurance by switching to Salamantis-co!"
Austin Blue: "Read, man, read!!"
G'nite, all.
| 380 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:44:01pm |
| 381 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:44:42pm |
re: #376 Sharmuta
Over on the right hand side is a couple of boxes where the up-loader's info is. The give the URL and Embed, and it will tell you if the video's disabled or not.
Much thanks. I never noticed that before.
| 382 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:45:01pm |
re: #370 Salamantis
The Southern Baptists and the Assembly of God-ers and the Church of the Nazarenists are all creationist, and would be only too happy to open beaucoup schools to take up the slack of the closing down of the publlic school system and undercut their competition just so long as they can also indoctrinate the kids they get, and get their tithes rolling in once they graduate and get employed.
Isn't getting employed better than the alternative?
| 383 |
Killgore Trout Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:46:14pm |
re: #377 iceweasel
Damn, I never knew that. Don't tell the Paulians and Tea Party folks. They'll be really pissed.
| 384 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:47:16pm |
re: #347 Thanos
Initial exit polling had more conservatives voting Obama than Liberals voting for McCain. I don't remember the exact numbers or percents, but it would have made the election a dead heat or win for McCain if they hadn't crossed over. It's a concern that they did, I'd love to know Powell's reasoning and theirs so we can make sure it doesn't happen in 2012.
That's interesting, but bear in mind that more people self-identify as 'conservative' rather than as 'liberal', in part because of the successful demonisation of the word 'liberal'. This doesn't cross over into party affiliation-- there are people that always vote or are registered Democrat, but call themselves 'conservative'.
| 385 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:47:28pm |
re: #377 iceweasel
Of course, Tom Paine is the original secular progressive.
You'd better quit that. Next thing you know, they'll start reading the letters between Jefferson and Adams and learn that the idea of a "Christian nation" was utterly repugnant to the founders. THEN WHERE WILL WE BE? What's next, suggesting that Sarah Palin might not actually be the most agile philosophical mind since Socrates???
| 386 |
Chekote Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:47:52pm |
Elected GOP officials are afraid of pissing off Rush fans. Powell happens to be correct. However, I don't see that Powell is offering anything to counter Rush. He talks about a big tent. Has he done anything to make it bigger? I have not heard of Powell going into the AA community and urging people to join the GOP. His solution to make the party bigger was to vote for Obama.
| 387 |
NelsFree Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:47:59pm |
re: #370 Salamantis
I attend a Southern Baptist Church. It is not Creationist. Blinders, man, BLINDERS!
G'nite again.
| 388 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:14pm |
I know too many people who were upper middle class, accustomed to voting Republican but saw the core of the Republican Party as being too ideological and liked the overtures that Obama made regarding "pragmatism" and "bringing in the best minds" ala Warren Buffet (whose advice was asked after the "stimulus" and was summarily ignored).
I warned them that Obama was no moderate but they wanted to vote for him and ignored the warning signs.
This whole Gates affair has many of them regretting their votes. But at the same time we have the Republican Party doubling down on:
creationism
nirtherism
justifying domestic terrorist (killing a guy who does something legal but that you want to make illegal is OK)
There is a vacuum that a Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater could fill - both always emphasized the needs of a free country to engage in free enterprise before emphasizing "culture wars".
Reagan didn't unite the country over social issues - he did it over jobs and growth.
That is where the Republicans aren't.
| 389 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:14pm |
re: #377 iceweasel
And, of course, since all of the founders were good Christians (even the Congregationalists and the Deists!!) none of the secularism of a Thomas Paine had any influence on the Constitution or the Federalist Papers...
| 390 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:15pm |
re: #377 iceweasel
Yes- Thomas Paine was of the unconstrained vision. I still like him tho.
| 391 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:21pm |
re: #347 Thanos
Initial exit polling had more conservatives voting Obama than Liberals voting for McCain. I don't remember the exact numbers or percents, but it would have made the election a dead heat or win for McCain if they hadn't crossed over. It's a concern that they did, I'd love to know Powell's reasoning and theirs so we can make sure it doesn't happen in 2012.
I'm with you on that one. It will likely never happen, but I really would like to hear Powell out on what his principles as a republican are and what it was about Obama that matched up with those principles better than McCain. I don't feel like that has been really well explained. Not to my satisfaction, anyway - but it would be instructive.
| 392 |
wiffersnapper Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:35pm |
Right, I forgot Colin Powell speaks for Republicans now.
| 393 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:48:44pm |
re: #383 Killgore Trout
Damn, I never knew that. Don't tell the Paulians and Tea Party folks. They'll be really pissed.
hee hee hee. Several of the prog bloggers have mocked the hell out of them for that reason. The Glenn Beck show featuring someone dressed as Thomas Paine was especially a source of merriment.
| 394 |
Bloodnok Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:49:42pm |
re: #388 karmic_inquisitor
You are on a major roll tonight, Karmic.
| 395 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:49:44pm |
re: #387 NelsFree
I attend a Southern Baptist Church. It is not Creationist. Blinders, man, BLINDERS!
G'nite again.
Are they anti booze?
| 396 |
Egregious Philbin Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:49:51pm |
He is right.
The party allows a college drop out disc jockey who acts out for ratings to determine their fate.
How sad.
| 397 |
Targetpractice Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:50:06pm |
I know some of the earlier posters suggested it was a good thing that the GOP is afraid of Rush and his listeners, because it meant they were listening. But what are they listening to? That you're angry they spoke against The Great and Powerful Limbaugh or that he disapproves of what they're doing? I don't want a party that runs all of its actions by Saint Rush, I want one that's willing to take its lumps but stick to its guns. If that means taking actions that I disagree with, at least I know where they stand, rather than where they've jumped because Rush barked.
I guess what I'm really trying to say is I want a party that, at the end of the day, does what I agree with because they think it's the right thing, rather than because I'm threatening to withhold funds or because Rush Limbaugh says its what they should do.
| 398 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:50:09pm |
re: #382 Alouette
Isn't getting employed better than the alternative?
The only point I'm making is that creationist denominations would discount and take a loss on providing education as an investment, expecting future tithe returns.
| 399 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:50:14pm |
re: #384 iceweasel
That's interesting, but bear in mind that more people self-identify as 'conservative' rather than as 'liberal', in part because of the successful demonisation of the word 'liberal'. This doesn't cross over into party affiliation-- there are people that always vote or are registered Democrat, but call themselves 'conservative'.
I think there's a demonization of the word "conservative" now.
Although, I GUARANTEE, there are a crapload of closet conservatives. I also guarantee, if you gave a basic questionnaire with a bunch of questions, the average person who doesn't have any real preconceived notions about either side will come out on the conservative side.
| 400 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:50:29pm |
re: #384 iceweasel
That's interesting, but bear in mind that more people self-identify as 'conservative' rather than as 'liberal', in part because of the successful demonisation of the word 'liberal'. This doesn't cross over into party affiliation-- there are people that always vote or are registered Democrat, but call themselves 'conservative'.
Funny that, and here am I a conservative with the opinion that the situation is reversed (on which term is demonized). But both of us could have predicted that, eh?
| 401 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:50:33pm |
re: #388 karmic_inquisitor
True enough...and does anybody really expect the lede to be: "Powell: Rush is afraid of the GOP"?
| 402 |
Ward Cleaver Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:51:13pm |
re: #327 Ojoe
We need a new party in toto, not new blood in either of the two main existing parties, IMHO.
That may be what it takes, but that's a long haul, it's not a one cycle thing.
| 403 |
Neutral President Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:51:14pm |
re: #285 Sharmuta
This is why I favor the Balanced Budget Amendment. It would really separate the wheat from the chaff. If a conservative can't support it, then I question their fiscal responsibility credentials.
To me- a "RINO" is someone who spends money like a democrat. Since Newt was kicked from office, we've had nothing but RINOs losing us elections while conservatives stay home.
Unfortunately, we have Rush banging the drum everyday that RINOs are losing us elections (which is true) but then claiming that what makes them RINOs is that they don't support teaching ID in science class, they don't think "there might be something to" this Nirther bullshit, they didn't support saving Terri Schiavo, etc, etc...
No, Rush, they are RINOs because they spend and borrow money like drunken democrats.
| 404 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:51:50pm |
re: #396 Egregious Philbin
Egads...nothing like that erudite, intellectual, statesman from Minnesota who was just seated in the Senate!
| 406 |
Egregious Philbin Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:52:36pm |
re: #404 LionOfDixon
So, because Franken is an idiot as well, my point is moot?
| 407 |
jaunte Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:52:42pm |
re: #390 Sharmuta
Yes- Thomas Paine was of the unconstrained vision. I still like him tho.
He was a real terror with a couple of glasses of wine in him. It was all "We have it in our power to begin the world over again." Righty-o, Tom, first thing in the morning, we'll see to it.
| 408 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:52:45pm |
re: #403 ArchangelMichael
Unfortunately, we have Rush banging the drum everyday that RINOs are losing us elections (which is true) but then claiming that what makes them RINOs is that they don't support teaching ID in science class, they don't think "there might be something to" this Nirther bullshit, they didn't support saving Terri Schiavo, etc, etc...
No, Rush, they are RINOs because they spend and borrow money like drunken democrats.
Exactly! If I want to elect someone who will spend like a democrat- I could vote for a democrat.
| 409 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:53:20pm |
re: #387 NelsFree
I attend a Southern Baptist Church. It is not Creationist. Blinders, man, BLINDERS!
G'nite again.
Wrong again!
[Link: www.sbc.net...]
Resolution On Scientific Creationism
June 1982
WHEREAS, The theory of evolution has never been proven to be a scientific fact, and
WHEREAS, Public school students are now being indoctrinated in evolution-science, and
WHEREAS, Creation-science can be presented solely in terms of scientific evidence without any religious doctrines or concepts, and
WHEREAS, Public school students should be taught all the scientific evidence on the subject of the origin of the world and life, and
WHEREAS, Academic freedom and free speech should be encouraged rather than inhibited.
Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Southern Baptist Convention in session in New Orleans, Louisiana, June 1982, express our support for the teaching of Scientific Creationism in our public schools.
| 410 |
MrPaulRevere Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:53:26pm |
re: #373 MrPaulRevere
All multiple term Presidents have been perceived to be sympathetic to the concerns of the middle class. Just ask George HW Bush. Or Jimmy Carter. John McCain was perceived to be a filthy rich beltway insider incapable of relating to someone making $40,000 a year. It was valid criticism.
| 411 |
Sharmuta Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:54:00pm |
Sadly- I have to step away from this conversation for a few. I will brb, but I didn't want anyone to think I was ignoring them. Play nice while I'm gone.
| 412 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:54:32pm |
re: #406 Egregious Philbin
Republicans never elected Limbaugh. However, Democrats elected Franken. Rush comments on policy. Franken actually drafts and votes on it.
| 413 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:54:39pm |
re: #285 Sharmuta
This is why I favor the Balanced Budget Amendment. It would really separate the wheat from the chaff. If a conservative can't support it, then I question their fiscal responsibility credentials.
To me- a "RINO" is someone who spends money like a democrat. Since Newt was kicked from office, we've had nothing but RINOs losing us elections while conservatives stay home.
Sharm-
So Bill Clinton balancing the Fed budget by raising taxes on high earners was okay? W dropping 700 billion dollars on the TWAT (Total War Against Terror) without raising taxes on high earners to pay for it was bad?
Just checking...
| 414 |
right_wing2 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:55:07pm |
I'll take what Rush says as more believable than anything Colin Powell has said since falling for the Obamessiah.
Do I think Rush is right all the time? No. But I think he's far more in touch with reality & the truth than Powell or Obama.
| 415 |
WindHorse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:55:37pm |
re: #412 LionOfDixon
...when he isn't out looking for someone to body tackle...
| 416 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:55:40pm |
re: #400 Pianobuff
Funny that, and here am I a conservative with the opinion that the situation is reversed (on which term is demonized). But both of us could have predicted that, eh?
Well, I'm thinking all the way back to the 88 election where Dukakis was accused of being a liberal as if it were a smear. Then we've had years of politicans refusing to describe themselves as liberal-- still do. But I don't see any corresponding reluctance on the part of republican politicians to call themselves 'conservative'. This has a trickledown effect on the public, so the public doesn't use the word 'liberal' to describe themselves, even when they support liberal positions.
The same thing happened with the word 'feminist'. Lots of people won't describe themselves as 'feminists', because in their mind in means something like 'crazy man-hater'. But in reality feminism is just humanism: the radical idea that women are people.
| 417 |
Targetpractice Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:56:02pm |
re: #388 karmic_inquisitor
There is a vacuum that a Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater could fill - both always emphasized the needs of a free country to engage in free enterprise before emphasizing "culture wars".
Reagan didn't unite the country over social issues - he did it over jobs and growth.
That is where the Republicans aren't.
That's what makes me shake my head at so many folks who describe this social conservative or that one, simply because he has a silver tongue in his head, as "The Next Reagan." Sorry, but Ron preached a strong economy and fiscal conservatism, while also preaching that people should be allowed as much liberty as they could handle. Social conservatism is a dead-end street for the GOP and the harder they push it, the more moderates they push into the arms of the Dem Party.
| 418 |
Chekote Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:56:11pm |
Reagan didn't unite the country over social issues - he did it over jobs and growth.That is where the Republicans aren't.
The TheoCons in the party have completely re-written history as far as Reagan and Gingrich. According to them, it was the social issues the won they day. Never mind that Reagan ran on 1) Defeating communism; 2) Improving the economy; 3) Rebuilding the military and American pride. As far as the Contract with America, it did not address ONE social issue. Unless you want to count welfare reform. The truth is that Republicans win when the emphasize fiscal and defense issues. But don't tell that to the TheoCons.
| 419 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:56:34pm |
Political lesson #1.
Do not alienate 20 million potential voters.
Like it or not, that is the way it is.
| 420 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:56:34pm |
re: #394 Bloodnok
You are on a major roll tonight, Karmic.
Thanks. It was all clearer to me when I left the party that I spent so many years trying to grow. It only takes a few self righteous ass holes to drive off people who would otherwise be inclined to join.
I am a Californian - born and raised here. It used to be a Republican stronghold that sent Nixon and Reagan to the White House. Now we can barely populate the legislature with enough Republicans to keep the state solvent.
People are just too libertarian minded here to go along with the giant pill labeled "morality" that the SoCons want to serve us with every meal. It is every bit as Nanny-ish as the crap that the Democrats want to force feed us so that we can properly honor Gaia.
| 421 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 7:59:09pm |
re: #415 WindHorse
I love this bit of liberal logic from the new Senator: "Franken said he’s not a Dean supporter but that he tackled the heckler to shut him up in order to preserve free speech.."
Brilliant!
| 423 |
VioletTiger Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:00:17pm |
re: #369 austin_blue
Actually, you are required to treat me if you are a doctor. Here in central Texas, we had to establish a taxing district to collect money to pay for emergency room costs incurred at our various area hospitals. They are hellacious compared to any insurance plan. As far as housing is concerned, you should familiarize yourself with the Section 8 housing program administered by HUD. And no, you really, really wouldn't want to live in public housing.
I think you missed my point. If the things you mention are RIGHTS, then somebody has to provide them. Look at medical care. If I have to treat you, do I get paid? How much? What if I were an accountant or a plumber--am I obligated to provide those services as well? This 'insurance plan' may help avoid your taxing district, but it spreads the cost over a wider base. How far does 'basic care' go? If you are getting 'free care', should you get the same extent of care as somebody who is paying for it themselves?
Again, just questions for thought/discussion.
| 424 |
WindHorse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:00:18pm |
re: #421 LionOfDixon
liberal logic... an oxymoron if there ever was one...
| 425 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:00:37pm |
re: #384 iceweasel
That's interesting, but bear in mind that more people self-identify as 'conservative' rather than as 'liberal', in part because of the successful demonisation of the word 'liberal'.
I would strongly suggest reading The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Hofstadter (as an academic challenge, provide examples of current-day commentary that don't fit his mold perfectly) and Politics and the English Language by Orwell.
| 426 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:00:51pm |
re: #399 TheMatrix31
I also guarantee, if you gave a basic questionnaire with a bunch of questions, the average person who doesn't have any real preconceived notions about either side will come out on the conservative side.
This doesn't seem to be true. In polls, america is not a center-right nation on social issues--despite the lazy media trope that it is.
On fiscal issues, I think it probably would be though. Which is one reason why I think a party that booted the so-cons and theocrats and embraced social progressivism and fiscal conservatism would be a winner, statistically speaking.
| 427 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:01:21pm |
Here's a true story. My wife went up to Vegas to do some GOP voter canvassing the weekend before the GE. It was a weekend bus thing organized by the McCain campaign with lodging, etc and various random people from LA/OC that were signed up. A bus full of strangers.
My wife's aunt joined her for the trip.
Her aunt had for the first time in her life crossed over from D to R, largely I believe because she was very much behind Hillary and disapproved of certain things in the D primary. Picture a Japanese female union electrician worker who grew up in Hawaii and ultimately went to work in downtown LA in some pretty offbeat places as the only female in the crew. Solid D. Way solid D. Unionista, etc. You get the picture.
So they go up and come back. I ask the aunt how things went. This is what she says: "You know, the thing that surprised me the most is that there were no rich people on the bus."
What does one say to that?
| 428 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:02:09pm |
Rush makes a lot of very good statements and observations. And also says some things I don't agree with. I'm glad that someone with his opinions on fiscal policy has the ear of so many millions of people.
| 429 |
Vicious Babushka Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:02:09pm |
re: #398 Salamantis
The only point I'm making is that creationist denominations would discount and take a loss on providing education as an investment, expecting future tithe returns.
Crappy education means less tithe revenue. I'm assuming they are greedy enough to know they don't want to diminish their own revenue stream.
| 430 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:02:19pm |
re: #426 iceweasel
This doesn't seem to be true. In polls, america is not a center-right nation on social issues--despite the lazy media trope that it is.
On fiscal issues, I think it probably would be though. Which is one reason why I think a party that booted the so-cons and theocrats and embraced social progressivism and fiscal conservatism would be a winner, statistically speaking.
As long as it also embraced a strong national defense.
| 432 |
BenghaziHoops Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:02:49pm |
re: #420 karmic_inquisitor
Thanks. It was all clearer to me when I left the party that I spent so many years trying to grow. It only takes a few self righteous ass holes to drive off people who would otherwise be inclined to join.
I am a Californian - born and raised here. It used to be a Republican stronghold that sent Nixon and Reagan to the White House. Now we can barely populate the legislature with enough Republicans to keep the state solvent.
People are just too libertarian minded here to go along with the giant pill labeled "morality" that the SoCons want to serve us with every meal. It is every bit as Nanny-ish as the crap that the Democrats want to force feed us so that we can properly honor Gaia.
I was born and raised also in California...Sad to see them go broke..
Back when they were flush with cash they had every program you could think of...Now the state is broke...Hopefully in 10 years the state will be reformed
| 433 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:03:20pm |
re: #422 taxfreekiller
Now you can go back to talking of how much your going to like reservation life under the xxx Democrats like Henry Wackman.
If you need some links check out say, a Sioux one in North Dakota,
or say the Navajo in New Mexico, or some such, that should get you
all tuned up for government health care and the like.
I think most Americans have tuned in on what Obamacare is about and are saying "no thanks". That seems clear from the polling. But if you listen to the SoCons, that translates into "They want us back!"
Liberal Democrats want to control your thought and deed. So do SoCons.
Different thoughts.
Different deeds.
But they both want control.
Fuck 'em both.
| 434 |
Egregious Philbin Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:03:28pm |
Radio talk hosts are like WCW wrestling. Its all an act. If you went back in time 25 years ago and offered Rush $$$ to do liberal talk, he would have done it in a heartbeat.
| 435 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:03:50pm |
re: #426 iceweasel
This doesn't seem to be true. In polls, america is not a center-right nation on social issues--despite the lazy media trope that it is.
On fiscal issues, I think it probably would be though. Which is one reason why I think a party that booted the so-cons and theocrats and embraced social progressivism and fiscal conservatism would be a winner, statistically speaking.
That's more of what I meant anyway.
| 436 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:04:03pm |
re: #429 Alouette
Crappy education means less tithe revenue. I'm assuming they are greedy enough to know they don't want to diminish their own revenue stream.
Since most jobs do not require acknowledgment of the empirical validity of evolutionary theory, it would cost them a helluva lot less than the benefits they would receive from indoctrinating their pupils in a distinguishing dogma.
| 437 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:04:57pm |
re: #434 Egregious Philbin
Radio talk hosts are like WCW wrestling. Its all an act. If you went back in time 25 years ago and offered Rush $$$ to do liberal talk, he would have done it in a heartbeat.
So Rush was paid big bucks from the start? BULLSHIT.
| 438 |
WindHorse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:05:12pm |
re: #434 Egregious Philbin
... yeah, and today he'd be a Senator (...you did make mention of WCW).
| 439 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:05:18pm |
re: #435 TheMatrix31
That's more of what I meant anyway.
I thought it might be what you meant. I really meant it as a clarification or expansion of your comment, not a criticism. :)
| 440 |
Neutral President Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:05:29pm |
re: #430 Salamantis
As long as it also embraced a strong national defense.
And didn't include the 2nd Amendment into that "socon" stuff that was getting booted.
| 441 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:06:01pm |
re: #427 Pianobuff
Reminds me of the story of a guy who went to Vegas in a $60,000 car and came back on a $175,000 Greyhound bus.
| 442 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:06:03pm |
re: #416 iceweasel
Well, I'm thinking all the way back to the 88 election where Dukakis was accused of being a liberal as if it were a smear. Then we've had years of politicans refusing to describe themselves as liberal-- still do. But I don't see any corresponding reluctance on the part of republican politicians to call themselves 'conservative'. This has a trickledown effect on the public, so the public doesn't use the word 'liberal' to describe themselves, even when they support liberal positions.
The same thing happened with the word 'feminist'. Lots of people won't describe themselves as 'feminists', because in their mind in means something like 'crazy man-hater'. But in reality feminism is just humanism: the radical idea that women are people.
I'll agree "liberal" has had its turn in the meat grinder, but feel that's less of an issue now than back in the Reagan. I may also have a slight regional bias, as I live in SoCal and the "c" word is usually spoken only in dimly lit rooms in a low voice.
| 443 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:06:40pm |
re: #434 Egregious Philbin
Radio talk hosts are like WCW wrestling. Its all an act. If you went back in time 25 years ago and offered Rush $$$ to do liberal talk, he would have done it in a heartbeat.
re: #437 Erik The Red
So Rush was paid big bucks from the start? BULLSHIT.
Show me one liberal talk radio show that makes money or is still around.
| 444 |
lobo91 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:06:56pm |
re: #423 VioletTiger
I think you missed my point. If the things you mention are RIGHTS, then somebody has to provide them. Look at medical care. If I have to treat you, do I get paid? How much? What if I were an accountant or a plumber--am I obligated to provide those services as well? This 'insurance plan' may help avoid your taxing district, but it spreads the cost over a wider base. How far does 'basic care' go? If you are getting 'free care', should you get the same extent of care as somebody who is paying for it themselves?
Again, just questions for thought/discussion.
It's also not accurate to say that doctors are required to treat anyone.
Private hospitals are required to provide enough medical care to someone to stabilize their condition, after which they can be transferred to a public hospital.
That doesn't mean that someone without insurance or the means to pay can wander into any random doctor's office and demand treatment.
| 445 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:07:33pm |
The GOP is afraid of Rush?
Why would they be afraid of a Canadian rock group?
| 446 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:08:03pm |
re: #445 victor_yugo
The GOP is afraid of Rush?
Why would they be afraid of a Canadian rock group?
LOL.
| 447 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:08:12pm |
There are some talk show hosts who would/did sell out, Rush is not one of them.
| 448 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:08:20pm |
re: #425 negativ
I would strongly suggest reading The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Hofstadter (as an academic challenge, provide examples of current-day commentary that don't fit his mold perfectly) and Politics and the English Language by Orwell.
Two of my ALLTIME favourite essays! I keep sending the Hofstader to friends, and I reread Politics and the English Language about once a year just because it's so brilliant.
It's incredible how much those two essays alone explain about what's happening right now in American politics.
| 449 |
WindHorse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:08:30pm |
re: #441 LionOfDixon
and THAT reminds me of the guy in Arkansas that one a week long vacation to anywhere in the world... and he chose Salt Lake City, Utah...
| 450 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:08:37pm |
re: #445 victor_yugo
The GOP is afraid of Rush?
Why would they be afraid of a Canadian rock group?
Mr. Roboto scares me.
| 452 |
redc1c4 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:09:12pm |
Powell needs a nice big canteen of STFU...
he's not a republican or a conservative, so who gives a tinker's damn what he thinks.
| 453 |
Kaymad Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:09:20pm |
I haven't liked Powell in years, certainly not since the Scooter Libby mess when he KNEW damn well the leak came from his office almost from the beginning of the investigation. Do any of the reporters ask him about that?? Of course not, because he is the kind of "republican" that the media loves which is the back stabbing kind. And it ain't a democrats back he's sticking the knife into, but than it never is with moderates (see McCain, John), is it? Colin Powell a republican??? Don't make me laugh. Colin Powell has always been about gaining as much media adulation as he can get.
| 455 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:09:37pm |
re: #445 victor_yugo
Probably Geddy Lee's voice. It can scare dogs and small children even today.
| 456 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:01pm |
re: #452 redc1c4
Powell needs a nice big canteen of STFU...
he's not a republican or a conservative, so who gives a tinker's damn what he thinks.
Hey red. What's up?
| 457 |
Neutral President Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:10pm |
re: #416 iceweasel
Well, I'm thinking all the way back to the 88 election where Dukakis was accused of being a liberal as if it were a smear. Then we've had years of politicans refusing to describe themselves as liberal-- still do. But I don't see any corresponding reluctance on the part of republican politicians to call themselves 'conservative'. This has a trickledown effect on the public, so the public doesn't use the word 'liberal' to describe themselves, even when they support liberal positions.
The same thing happened with the word 'feminist'. Lots of people won't describe themselves as 'feminists', because in their mind in means something like 'crazy man-hater'. But in reality feminism is just humanism: the radical idea that women are people.
But even back before the 88 election the word liberal was already being misused. It's been co-opted by social progressives to describe even their economic policy which is totally illiberal, and those of us "classical liberals" just let the left get away with it to the point of it being far too late to bitch about it too much now.
| 458 |
VioletTiger Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:15pm |
re: #426 iceweasel
This doesn't seem to be true. In polls, america is not a center-right nation on social issues--despite the lazy media trope that it is.
On fiscal issues, I think it probably would be though. Which is one reason why I think a party that booted the so-cons and theocrats and embraced social progressivism and fiscal conservatism would be a winner, statistically speaking.
What would fall under social progressivism? Is it just things like gay marriage and abortion or are there other issues?
| 459 |
Chekote Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:40pm |
re: #426 iceweasel
I believe that a majority of American voters are fiscally conservative and socially moderate to liberal. My frustration with social issues is that I don't quite understand what SoCons expect government to do about them. Do they want to legislate private behavior? If they do, that completely undercuts the argument for limited government.
Today, I was listening to Hannity and he was going on and on about the Dems wanting to place government between the patient and the doctor. That the Dems wanted to have government in charge of choosing medical procedures. I found it kinda ironic since Hannity has for years advocated for government to get between a woman and her doctor and choose procedures when it comes reproductive decisions. How about when Hannity advocated for the federal government to get involved in the Schiavo case? I am sure the irony escapes Mr. Hannity.
| 460 |
Egregious Philbin Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:44pm |
re: #437 Erik The Red
No, just noting that radio people are about the dough, not what they say. You have fallen under the spell of talk radio. Its a carnival! You are eating cotton candy and thinking that you are getting nourishment.
| 461 |
austin_blue Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:10:58pm |
re: #423 VioletTiger
I think you missed my point. If the things you mention are RIGHTS, then somebody has to provide them. Look at medical care. If I have to treat you, do I get paid? How much? What if I were an accountant or a plumber--am I obligated to provide those services as well? This 'insurance plan' may help avoid your taxing district, but it spreads the cost over a wider base. How far does 'basic care' go? If you are getting 'free care', should you get the same extent of care as somebody who is paying for it themselves?
Again, just questions for thought/discussion.
Okay, She Who must be Obeyed is home from her gig, so I will be signing off (good night all Lizards, and all the ships at sea!). Yes, government programs pay for the uninsured, to a point, on emergency room visits of the uninsured. The community must make up the difference, hence the taxing district, which lays the remaining costs on all of the citizens in the taxing district. Of course you will not be required to pay for accounting or plumbing services. They are not covered by any government program. I think the difference is that those are not emergencies (unless of course, your basement is flooding, but that's a different kind of emergency!!).
| 462 |
TheMatrix31 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:11:14pm |
re: #439 iceweasel
I thought it might be what you meant. I really meant it as a clarification or expansion of your comment, not a criticism. :)
I mean, I'll be the first to admit that I'm somewhat of a religious guy. I'm not for pushing it into public spheres, because it's a deeply personal thing for me. That said, I don't really want to push the social cons out because in a way, it'd be pushing me out too.
The problem with pushing a progressive social + fiscal conservative agenda is that it's too much like the libertarians, which have gone whacko. Libertarianism would be a good idea, if it were 1890. Get the libertarianism, tone the social freedoms down a bit, tone the economic stuff down a bit, push forth strong foreign policy (which most libertarians dont want), and there's the party.
| 463 |
lobo91 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:11:32pm |
| 464 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:11:36pm |
re: #450 karmic_inquisitor
Mr. Roboto scares me.
My heart is human, my brain IBM!
Domo arigato, Mister Roboto!
| 465 |
kansas Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:11:55pm |
re: #443 Erik The Red
Show me one liberal talk radio show that makes money or is still around.
Al Franken?
| 466 |
Neutral President Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:11:59pm |
re: #459 Chekote
That is a reason to shun and ridicule Sean Vanity, not to consider CommieCare®.
| 467 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:12:03pm |
re: #425 negativ
I would strongly suggest reading The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Hofstadter (as an academic challenge, provide examples of current-day commentary that don't fit his mold perfectly)
By the way, I sent the Hofstader link to a conservative friend just two days ago, and strongly urged her to read it and consider writing an essay that updated it for the present day. Someone on the conservative side should do that. (On the progressive side, examples of bloggers who reference it/update it are everywhere)
| 468 |
harpsicon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:12:18pm |
re: #377 iceweasel
It is precisely for this kind of stuff that Paine was pretty much ostracized by the other Founding Fathers, had no role in the making of the Constitution, etc.
He's an interesting figure, to be sure, but his ideas were so radical as to place him beyond the pale as far as the Washingtons, Adamses and Jeffersons were concerned.
| 469 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:12:19pm |
re: #426 iceweasel
This doesn't seem to be true. In polls, america is not a center-right nation on social issues--despite the lazy media trope that it is.
On fiscal issues, I think it probably would be though. Which is one reason why I think a party that booted the so-cons and theocrats and embraced social progressivism and fiscal conservatism would be a winner, statistically speaking.
Has there been a single state where a gay marriage was voted down? How soundly was a gay marriage ban passed in... CALIFORNIA??
| 470 |
dapperdave Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:13:16pm |
Now that Colin Powell and his progressive socialist friends have wrecked havoc on our economy I guess it's time for them to go somewhere else and cause economic chaos on someone else's economy, Israel perhaps?
[Link: www.israelnationalnews.com...]
| 471 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:13:35pm |
| 472 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:13:38pm |
re: #469 cliffster
Has there been a single state where a gay marriage was voted down? How soundly was a gay marriage ban passed in... CALIFORNIA??
Only because they already have legal gay civil unions.
| 473 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:14:30pm |
| 474 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:15:01pm |
re: #472 Salamantis
Only because they already have legal gay civil unions.
Was there a voter study that has proven that out?
| 475 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:15:02pm |
re: #469 cliffster
Has there been a single state where a gay marriage was voted down? How soundly was a gay marriage ban passed in... CALIFORNIA??
Very soundly. But it was struck down by the state's Supreme Leaders Court.
| 476 |
Neutral President Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:15:27pm |
Just for the record, since red reminded me of one of my favorite phrases.
I don't give a Tinker's damn what either Colin Powell or Rush Limbaugh says anymore. Powell supported the most leftist candidate possible for reasons I cannot fathom. Rush has ODS and pigeonholes fiscal conservatives in with the RINOs.
I'm pretty much done with both of them.
| 478 |
Balian1193 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:15:45pm |
There are far worse things in life than being afraid of Rush Limbaugh, like following the advice of a so called "Republican" who voted for Obama based on skin color. Lets be real, that's the only reason why Colin Powell voted for Obama. He knows it, you know it, and I know it.
| 479 |
lobo91 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:16:13pm |
re: #475 victor_yugo
Very soundly. But it was struck down by the state's Supreme
LeadersCourt.
Funny how much California's government is like that of Iran, isn't it?
| 480 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:16:47pm |
re: #469 cliffster
Has there been a single state where a gay marriage was voted down? How soundly was a gay marriage ban passed in... CALIFORNIA??
People are far more supportive of gay rights than they were just 20 years ago. Gay marriage is inevitable; that will be here too one day. Blowing the dogwhistle about gay marriage isn't a winning election strategy any more--and gay panic or homophobia no longer plays, in an era when even if people don't know anyone gay, they now think of gay people as "that nice fellow on Will and Grace".
Even among young evangelical Christians, they're far more accepting of gay people now than their parents were.
| 482 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:17:47pm |
re: #443 Erik The Red
Alan Colmes must make millions judging by his luxurious hair stylings and impeccable sartorial appearance.
| 483 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:17:59pm |
re: #480 iceweasel
People are far more supportive of gay rights than they were just 20 years ago. Gay marriage is inevitable; that will be here too one day. Blowing the dogwhistle about gay marriage isn't a winning election strategy any more--and gay panic or homophobia no longer plays, in an era when even if people don't know anyone gay, they now think of gay people as "that nice fellow on Will and Grace".
Even among young evangelical Christians, they're far more accepting of gay people now than their parents were.
Which one?
| 484 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:18:03pm |
re: #472 Salamantis
Only because they already have legal gay civil unions.
So you're saying that I am not socially conservative if I want marriage defined as between a man and a woman, but believe that things like sharing insurance, etc, should be given to everybody?
| 485 |
kansas Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:18:11pm |
re: #473 Erik The Red
The clown that just got elected to the Senate?
Yeah. I was just kidding, but he's still around.
| 486 |
MrPaulRevere Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:18:39pm |
When it comes to political commentators (whatever the medium) I apply an ice cold analysis: Is this person an asset or a liability when it comes to advancing what I believe in ? Its almost always a mistake to become personally attached.
| 487 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:19:42pm |
re: #486 MrPaulRevere
When it comes to political commentators (whatever the medium) I apply an ice cold analysis: Is this person an asset or a liability when it comes to advancing what I believe in ? Its almost always a mistake to become personally attached.
Yes, but I still miss WFB Jr.
| 488 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:19:56pm |
re: #474 Pianobuff
Was there a voter study that has proven that out?
No, I'm just assuming that a significant portion of people were willing to reserve the word 'marriage' for heterosexual unions, provided that homosexual unions didn't have to suffer relative legal discrimination.
Maybe such an assumption makes an ass of me, but the vote was close (52% - 48 %) - much closer than the Obama election - and I think it is reasonable to assume that the fact that the state already had legal gay civil unions made enough of a difference to decide the vote.
| 489 |
karmic_inquisitor Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:19:59pm |
re: #454 Tarkus289
STYX, not Rush.
LOL.
Never went much for either group. So they kinda melted together in my brain.
| 490 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:20:09pm |
re: #351 Ward Cleaver
But Reagan was also strongly pro-life.
Yes, and he communicated his position very eloquently in speeches, but he didn't invest any political capital into pushing for laws or amendments to outlaw abortion. He recognized the majority at the time would not support it so why waste resources in a charge of the political light brigade when you knew the outcome. As governor of CA he actually signed a law that made therapeutic abortion legal, though he did seem to later regret doing so.
| 492 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:21:10pm |
re: #482 LionOfDixon
Alan Colmes must make millions judging by his luxurious hair stylings and impeccable sartorial appearance.
I can think of a few other ways he may make his money.
| 493 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:21:24pm |
re: #483 Pianobuff
People may also now think of gays as that A-hole Perez Hilton. He did them a lot of good, didn't he?
| 494 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:21:29pm |
re: #484 cliffster
So you're saying that I am not socially conservative if I want marriage defined as between a man and a woman, but believe that things like sharing insurance, etc, should be given to everybody?
I think that the word matters less than legal parity. My three gay cousins think so, too.
| 495 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:21:48pm |
re: #480 iceweasel
People are far more supportive of gay rights than they were just 20 years ago.
Because there's a clearer understanding of "gay rights" within the context of "civil rights." That is, the right to be left alone, the right to speak out without fear of physical attack, the right to self-defense.
However, "gay marriage" is a different ball of wax completely.
| 496 |
Pianobuff Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:21:49pm |
re: #488 Salamantis
No, I'm just assuming that a significant portion of people were willing to reserve the word 'marriage' for heterosexual unions, provided that homosexual unions didn't have to suffer relative legal discrimination.
Maybe such an assumption makes an ass of me, but the vote was close (52% - 48 %) - much closer than the Obama election - and I think it is reasonable to assume that the fact that the state already had legal gay civil unions made enough of a difference to decide the vote.
Darn, I was hoping you had one... I kind of feel the same way as you, and have hoped some empirical information would come out on this.
| 497 |
The Shadow Do Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:22:04pm |
The fact that Rush commands so much of the conversation, both left and right, says a lot. Just not sure what that 'is' is however.
| 498 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:22:04pm |
re: #480 iceweasel
People are far more supportive of gay rights than they were just 20 years ago. Gay marriage is inevitable; that will be here too one day. Blowing the dogwhistle about gay marriage isn't a winning election strategy any more--and gay panic or homophobia no longer plays, in an era when even if people don't know anyone gay, they now think of gay people as "that nice fellow on Will and Grace".
Even among young evangelical Christians, they're far more accepting of gay people now than their parents were.
Saying, or implying, that being against gay marriage is the same thing as "gay panic" or "homophobia" is ridiculous and insulting. Thinking that marriage has a specific meaning that doesn't include people of the same sex doesn't mean one has anything against homosexuals.
| 499 |
Tarkus289 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:22:11pm |
re: #492 Erik The Red
Selling ingots of Finkillium from his home planet?
| 500 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:23:08pm |
re: #494 Salamantis
I think that the word matters less than legal parity. My three gay cousins think so, too.
My two gay brothers would beg to disagree :)
| 501 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:23:13pm |
re: #493 LionOfDixon
People may also now think of gays as that A-hole Perez Hilton. He did them a lot of good, didn't he?
When even GLAAD won't support you, could it just maybe be that you're an asshole?
| 502 |
MrPaulRevere Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:23:40pm |
re: #487 Pianobuff
You bet! Buckley was flawed like all men, but he was a tremendous asset, and a solid performer, hence my admiration.
| 503 |
Erik The Red Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:24:29pm |
Sorry Lizards. Is there such a thing as testosterone over load? Only 5 days left and I will be in a less argumentative mood.
Good night and stay SCALY
| 504 |
LionOfDixon Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:24:38pm |
re: #492 Erik The Red
I like to describe Colmes' receding hairline coif as "The Colmeover."
| 505 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:25:07pm |
re: #502 MrPaulRevere
You bet! Buckley was flawed like all men, but he was a tremendous asset, and a solid performer, hence my admiration.
If a Catholic could be described in Yiddish, Buckley would be a mensch.
| 506 |
theheat Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:25:38pm |
re: #501 victor_yugo
Like, when you get in an argument, as a gay man, and one of the first insults you can hurl (at a straight man, no less) is calling someone a fucking faggot, that Perez Hilton?
I'd say that qualifies as Perez as an asshole. And GLAAD was none too happy about it.
| 507 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:25:50pm |
re: #458 VioletTiger
What would fall under social progressivism? Is it just things like gay marriage and abortion or are there other issues?
Well, I'll give you wiki-- notice that there's a difference between social progressivism and being progressive on social issues, in that social progressivism is often going to be in conflict with fiscal conservatism, to the extent that the social position requires government spending:
Current positions associated with social progressivism in the United States include legal recognition of same-sex marriage, access to contraceptives, public funding of embryonic stem-cell research, and abortion rights. Public education is a subject of great interest to social progressives, who support comprehensive sex education in public schools and the distribution of condoms to high school students, but are strongly opposed to school prayer (on grounds that it violates separation of church and state), school vouchers (on grounds that it distracts from the problem of public school under-performance and deprives them of funds), and opposition to intelligent design in curriculums.[citation needed]
Today, a majority of social progressives in the United States are associated with the Democratic Party. The Congressional Progressive Caucus in the United States House of Representatives works together to advance liberal issues and positions. The group advocates "universal access to affordable, high quality healthcare," fair trade agreements, living wage laws, right of workers to organize, abolition of significant portions of the USA PATRIOT Act, legalization of same-sex marriage, campaign finance reform laws, a complete pullout from the war in Iraq, a crackdown on corporate welfare and influence, an increase in income tax rates on the wealthy, tax cuts for the poor, and an increase in welfare spending by the federal government. Fringe segments of the movement remain opposed to faith-based initiatives and the war in Afghanistan but are not endorsed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.The Progressive Democrats of America is a progressive political organization and Political Action Committee operating inside the Democratic Party. They support progressive taxation, a single-payer health care system, fair trade, election reform, and energy conservation.
| 508 |
Targetpractice Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:29:42pm |
re: #445 victor_yugo
The GOP is afraid of Rush?
Why would they be afraid of a Canadian rock group?
Because the voters want a party that's willing to roll the bones, a party that will take off the kid gloves and tell how it is. They don't want a party that puts on its bravest face, they want one that's closer to the heart and gives us hope. They don't want some fly by night party that wants to only wants the good news first or is faithless, they want a party with grand designs and free will. This isn't the Manhatten Project this is the working man with middletown dreams. A modern Tom Sawyer story.
| 509 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:30:23pm |
re: #344 Erik The Red
Request Lizards. I want to listen to something load and hard. Ant suggestions? I am undecided.
This is pretty good when played loud, and it gets harder as it goes. It's also relevent with Boston being in the news so much the last week.
| 510 |
Targetpractice Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:30:24pm |
Damn, didn't want the last two lines totally bolded.
PIMF
| 511 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:30:31pm |
re: #498 cliffster
Saying, or implying, that being against gay marriage is the same thing as "gay panic" or "homophobia" is ridiculous and insulting. Thinking that marriage has a specific meaning that doesn't include people of the same sex doesn't mean one has anything against homosexuals.
i didn't say or imply that. But homophobes do come out of the closet (heh) on this issue. I am not saying that everyone who opposes gay marriage is a homophobe, but that the issue has been used to arouse homophobes to vote in certain ways. Similarly, talk of a 'homosexual agenda' is designed to get the homophobe vote.
| 512 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:30:52pm |
re: #506 theheat
I'd say that qualifies as Perez as an asshole. And GLAAD was none too happy about it.
When Mr. Lavandeira went after Carrie Prejean with both barrels, GLAAD was conspicuously silent during the ensuing outrage.
| 513 |
VioletTiger Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:31:15pm |
re: #507 iceweasel
Ah, it is more complicated. I often wish we could separate a lot of these issues out of politics and into a general vote. For example, I have no problem with society defining marriage to include gay marriage, but I believe society, all of society, should get to choose this or not, rather than the governemnt passing a law without a vote.
| 514 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:31:54pm |
re: #508 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds
Oooouuuchshshhshshshshsh...
| 515 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:32:27pm |
re: #500 cliffster
My two gay brothers would beg to disagree :)
Well, my three gay cousins are all long-term gainfully employed in prestigious and well-paying jobs, own their own homes, and are all in long-term monogamous cohabiting relationships with their partners. They are pillars of their larger communities, active in charity work, and well-respected by their neighbors and vocational peers. They are mostly conservative-leaning (for instance, they are all 2nd Amendment supporting hunters, and for fiscal responsibility and strong national defence), and are disgusted by the in-your-face San Fran kinda gay flaunting that Zombie so often exposes, because they correctly perceive it as unfairly reflecting poorly upon them.
They're just the kinda people that republicans and conservatives should be embracing rather than demonizing.
| 516 |
Desert Dog Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:33:41pm |
re: #467 iceweasel
By the way, I sent the Hofstader link to a conservative friend just two days ago, and strongly urged her to read it and consider writing an essay that updated it for the present day. Someone on the conservative side should do that. (On the progressive side, examples of bloggers who reference it/update it are everywhere)
I've read Hofstader's works and find them lacking. He has the typical liberal academic blinders on that paint anyone not like him as either an unsophisticated dolt or a paranoid charlatan. The Paranoid Style in American Politics gets the history bits right, but he seems to put them in the context of his "today". The history of the US is strewn with tragedy, hatred, and savage political fighting. But, so what? What does that have to do with today? (or today in 1964?) What I do not like about him is his unabashed dislike of his own country. Why are American writers and intellectuals on the left ashamed of their heritage? For all the bad parts in our past, we have many more positives...more than most countries can claim with much longer histories.
Read your Hofstader, but step out of the echo chamber sometime and see what the other side is up to. I do.
| 517 |
Velvet Elvis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:34:25pm |
re: #507 iceweasel
I'd include affirmative action type equality issues under the mantle of social progressivism as well.
| 518 |
Korla Pundit Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:34:33pm |
> Why not just accept that Powell voted with his conscious, just as most voters do?
Because he voted specifically AGAINST the epitome of his stated principles, that the GOP should be a party that reaches across the aisle, etc. You know, a party that might pick as its candidate, oh, I dunno: John McCain?
It was certainly a poor choice if he had any concern for our national security, our allies, our enemies or our soldiers. Those principles, and his "conscience" were trumped by the feel-good fantasy of Hope and Change and empty promises of post-racial, bipartisan, transparent, fiscally responsible, and morally imperative rainbows and unicorns.
A man as smart as Powell was not suckered by the empty suit. He went along for the ride quite willingly, and his advice for conservatives he betrayed is unwelcome and insulting.
| 519 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:36:40pm |
re: #515 Salamantis
They're just the kinda people that republicans and conservatives should be embracing rather than demonizing.
How about a simple "I don't give a shit"?
| 520 |
cliffster Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:37:11pm |
re: #515 Salamantis
Well, that is certainly true. Being against gay marriage is not "demonizing" them, and I don't think you are saying that. I think that the perception of Conservatives being lecturing, preaching people about topics like homosexuality is much more a product of some media outlets painting them as such, leveraging people like Pat Buchanan.
| 521 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:38:15pm |
re: #519 victor_yugo
How about a simple "I don't give a shit"?
That would work. Gender-orientation blindness should be as much of an attribute of a decent, respectable political party as color blindness.
| 522 |
hokiepride Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:38:21pm |
Frankly,
Colin "Benedict Arnold" Powell can keep his high and mighty opinions to himself. After milking the magnanimity of W, he decided to repay W and the GOP by endorsing Obama when the GOP needed him. Hey Powell, you turncoat, STFU. You are a Democrat now, so concentrate on the O's falling approval ratings and Pelosi's facials. GOP needs Powell like a hole in the head
| 523 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:38:27pm |
re: #483 Pianobuff
Which one?
Heh. Will, I guess. (I've only watched about ten minutes of one episode).
Anyway, as more people have come out of the closet, homosexuality has just become a less scary thing to people. For most people it's no longer defined solely by weird photos of fetish parades. We have family members, co-workers, friends, acquaintances that are gay--or we know people who do. And when a show starring characters that are openly gay is a huge success, it helps people who might not know anyone gay to realise that gay people are just like everyone else, and not solely defined by their sexuality, any more than straight people are.
(i exclude shows like the L Factor and Queer as Folk, because there the whole point is to define people by their sexuality.)
| 524 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:40:40pm |
re: #520 cliffster
Well, that is certainly true. Being against gay marriage is not "demonizing" them, and I don't think you are saying that. I think that the perception of Conservatives being lecturing, preaching people about topics like homosexuality is much more a product of some media outlets painting them as such, leveraging people like Pat Buchanan.
No, I am NOT saying that. As I said before, they would be just as happy with civil unions that provided the same legal bennies as marriage does without the name. They're perfectly willing to let heterosexual unions keep it.
But since two of the three live in Alabama, it might be a while coming for them.
| 525 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:42:55pm |
re: #445 victor_yugo
The GOP is afraid of Rush?
Why would they be afraid of a Canadian rock group?
Perhaps because they keep pushing the concept of Free Will.
| 526 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:44:17pm |
re: #516 Desert Dog
What I do not like about him is his unabashed dislike of his own country. Why are American writers and intellectuals on the left ashamed of their heritage?
(snip)
step out of the echo chamber sometime and see what the other side is up to. I do.
I think you're the one who needs to step out of the echo chamber if you're repeating the lie that American writers and intellectuals on the left hate America or are ashamed of their heritage.
This is a nice manifestation of the same problem the thread is about: the inability of the current Republican party to handle criticism, and the need to see all criticism as 'treasonous'.
As for telling me to see what the other side is up too...Dude, I'm the progressive posting on LGF. How many progressive blogs are you reading?
(hint, reading DU, kos diaries, and nasty comments at HuffPo doesn't count. That'd be like me pretending that HotAir, WND, and Free Republic represent conservatives or Republicans.)
| 527 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:45:07pm |
re: #524 Salamantis
No, I am NOT saying that. As I said before, they would be just as happy with civil unions that provided the same legal bennies as marriage does without the name.
Starting with the obvious: If I can name my best friend as the primary beneficiary of my life insurance policy and the executor of my will, what's to stop your cousins from doing the same?
| 528 |
Velvet Elvis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:45:17pm |
re: #518 Korla Pundit
> Why not just accept that Powell voted with his conscious, just as most voters do?
Because he voted specifically AGAINST the epitome of his stated principles, that the GOP should be a party that reaches across the aisle, etc. You know, a party that might pick as its candidate, oh, I dunno: John McCain?
It was certainly a poor choice if he had any concern for our national security, our allies, our enemies or our soldiers. Those principles, and his "conscience" were trumped by the feel-good fantasy of Hope and Change and empty promises of post-racial, bipartisan, transparent, fiscally responsible, and morally imperative rainbows and unicorns.
A man as smart as Powell was not suckered by the empty suit. He went along for the ride quite willingly, and his advice for conservatives he betrayed is unwelcome and insulting.
Maybe he couldn't stomach Sarah Palin. I agree he and McCain are a perfect match but a lot of (myself included) just couldn't pull the lever for a ticket with Palin on it. I'm convinced she lost the election for the Republicans.
| 529 |
American Sabra Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:46:45pm |
But aren't civil unions unfair? Illegal even? Straight people must marry to reap the benefits of marriage. They can't simply live together and benefit from marriage perks. Why should sexuality make the difference? It doesn't in any other law.
They should be allowed to marry and be as miserable as the rest of us.
| 530 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:47:26pm |
re: #520 cliffster
Well, that is certainly true. Being against gay marriage is not "demonizing" them, and I don't think you are saying that. I think that the perception of Conservatives being lecturing, preaching people about topics like homosexuality is much more a product of some media outlets painting them as such, leveraging people like Pat Buchanan.
I think that perception is fueled by the elements within the GOP that do want to preach to people. Creationists come to mind.
It's not the media responsible for this; it's the existence of so-cons and the GOP's pandering to them.
| 531 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:47:32pm |
re: #477 Racer X
Oh crap, I did not see your post when I posted my reply to victor_yugo. Funny, two links to the same song for different reasons on the same thread.
| 533 |
horse Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:51:28pm |
re: #388 karmic_inquisitor
You drove that nail all the way flush with only one swing of the hammer, nice.
| 534 |
Velvet Elvis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:54:56pm |
re: #526 iceweasel
As for telling me to see what the other side is up too...Dude, I'm the progressive posting on LGF. How many progressive blogs are you reading?
(hint, reading DU, kos diaries, and nasty comments at HuffPo doesn't count. That'd be like me pretending that HotAir, WND, and Free Republic represent conservatives or Republicans.)
I have accounts on Kos, Here, Redstate, OpenLeft, I can't stand DU, and read about dozen other blogs from across the spectrum daily. I think it's good for my worldview. Plus I lean right on defense issues and left on everything else. I'm one of the few democrats who likes Joe Lieberman.
I've got a lot of respect for people who try and post on both sides of the fence.
| 535 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 8:55:32pm |
re: #527 victor_yugo
Starting with the obvious: If I can name my best friend as the primary beneficiary of my life insurance policy and the executor of my will, what's to stop your cousins from doing the same?
Why should gay partners have to go to the additional time, trouble and expense of doing what marriage does automatically? Why can't gay civil unions do this?
And it's not just inheritance issues, it's mutual medical decision issues, spousal employment benefit issues, family medical insurance coverage issues, tax issues...there are sooo many things that marriage does automatically. And to be nondiscriminatory and not a symbol of second-class citizenship, gay civil unions should do all of the same things automatically, as well.
Isn't that fair compensation and a reasonable compromise for yielding on the name?
| 536 |
Desert Dog Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:00:13pm |
re: #526 iceweasel
I think you're the one who needs to step out of the echo chamber if you're repeating the lie that American writers and intellectuals on the left hate America or are ashamed of their heritage.
This is a nice manifestation of the same problem the thread is about: the inability of the current Republican party to handle criticism, and the need to see all criticism as 'treasonous'.
As for telling me to see what the other side is up too...Dude, I'm the progressive posting on LGF. How many progressive blogs are you reading?
(hint, reading DU, kos diaries, and nasty comments at HuffPo doesn't count. That'd be like me pretending that HotAir, WND, and Free Republic represent conservatives or Republicans.)
That fact that you are here posting is a good sign, but do not think you can post here with someone calling you on it. Hofstader, Howard Zinn, Chomsky, et al are all cut from the save cloth and I disagree with their outlook. I am guessing you do not. We can agree to disagree. But, I cannot see anything in the writing and intellectual tretises of these guys showing a "pride" in their country, sorry if that hurts.
I go over to the "other side" on occasion, but blogs, in general are poor places to actually learn something. I read a lot - both sides of issues, both sides of a history. I run my worldview through certain filters and you run yours through others.
The left did nothing but whine and moan while Bush was in. I heard nothing but complaints and BS from the leadership. If it was not for Obama's charisma, it is was not clear "your side" would have even won this last Presidential election, in spite of the fact that GWB had some of the lowest approval ratings on record. But, I take great solace in the fact that all of the progressive crap currently being shoved down out throats will end in ultimate failure and another banishment to the wilderness for such ideas.
| 537 |
Van Helsing Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:04:17pm |
re: #536 Desert Dog
I take great solace in the fact that all of the progressive crap currently being shoved down out throats will end in ultimate failure and another banishment to the wilderness for such ideas.
Sooner would be better.
| 538 |
Gus Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:07:00pm |
I believe that Colin Powell is correct. A perfect example was the kerfuffle between Michael Steele and Rush Limbaugh earlier this year in which Mr. Steele literally takes back his comments and apologizes to Mr. Limbaugh.
However, I have to wonder how significant is this? If certain GOP members are being merely asked to debate Rush Limbaugh who is a private citizen and free to speak his mind on his own radio program? If Mr. Steele is the de facto leader of the party then he, not Mr. Limbaugh, speaks for the party who does not hold a position in congress.
On the other hand if Mr. Limbaugh is the unofficial party leader than what does that say about the GOP? Does he fill a vacuum not met by what sometimes seems to be weak (and occasionally foolish) leadership from the likes of Michael Steele?
| 539 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:15:09pm |
re: #536 Desert Dog
Hofstader, Howard Zinn, Chomsky, et al are all cut from the save cloth and I disagree with their outlook. I am guessing you do not.
We were talking about Hofstader's essay the Paranoid Style in American Politics. I say it's a brilliant essay and has much to teach us about the current situation-- in particular, it would be constructive for conservatives to take a look at what it's saying. That's my position and it's unchanged.
I don't see any reason to throw Chomsky, Zinn, or anyone else into the mix, but you have some idea about 'the intellectual left' and want to speak about it as if it were a monolithic entity, and you've stated everyone on the left is ashamed of America. That simply isn't true, and represents the same tired old claim that criticism, or a failure to slavishly adhere to conservatism ot the GOP = a lack or patriotism, or even treason.
I think that attitude poisons our discourse and is destroying the GOP. So yes, we do disagree and will continue to do so.
I don't think that waiting for the other party to fail is a very proactive strategy, but apparently the GOP would like to embrace that strategy rather than come up with new ideas or look at how they could improve.
| 540 |
BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:20:52pm |
re: #534 Conservative Moonbat
I have accounts on Kos, Here, Redstate, OpenLeft, I can't stand DU, and read about dozen other blogs from across the spectrum daily. I think it's good for my worldview. Plus I lean right on defense issues and left on everything else. I'm one of the few democrats who likes Joe Lieberman.
I've got a lot of respect for people who try and post on both sides of the fence.
I read a ton of stuff all across the spectrum too. I have a few fave blogs, and every day I check memeorandum to see what's going on and then I read a selection of opinion on each topic. It's not just good for my worldview but helps keep me informed about the media itself-- the metaissues about what's being covered and how. I'm not regged anywhere but here because I tend to not like blogs that require registration; most of the ones I read don't. Also this is the only place where I find discussion productive -- i'd much rather talk to people who think differently than I do.
Totally agree with you on DU. It's the free republic of the left.
| 541 |
Wendya Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:21:42pm |
The same Colin Powell who said when Obama was elected, "The America we remember is back again."?
Which America would that be, Jimmy Carters?
| 542 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:22:13pm |
re: #535 Salamantis
Why should gay partners have to go to the additional time, trouble and expense of doing what marriage does automatically? Why can't gay civil unions do this?
And it's not just inheritance issues, it's mutual medical decision issues, spousal employment benefit issues, family medical insurance coverage issues, tax issues...there are sooo many things that marriage does automatically.
Okay, FWIW, and AFAIK (and IANAL)...
None of these are automatic in Ohio. Without the signed paperwork, properly drawn up and attested by a lawyer, your next of kin do not get inheritance, medical decisions, insurance, etc., automatically. One probably could sue for these in state court, but it's far easier to do the paperwork and be done with it.
Not sure how it is in Alabama, or any other state.
| 543 |
bosforus Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:25:24pm |
He and Rush have been going back and forth for a while now. I'm not exactly sure he's the best person from which to get an objective point of view on the subject.
| 544 |
Van Helsing Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:27:43pm |
re: #541 Wendya
The same Colin Powell who said when Obama was elected, "The America we remember is back again."?
Which America would that be, Jimmy Carters?
Looking good so far. If interest rates go up and there is some poorly dealt with international incidents, I'd give it a 9.7.
| 545 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:33:43pm |
re: #542 victor_yugo
Okay, FWIW, and AFAIK (and IANAL)...
None of these are automatic in Ohio. Without the signed paperwork, properly drawn up and attested by a lawyer, your next of kin do not get inheritance, medical decisions, insurance, etc., automatically. One probably could sue for these in state court, but it's far easier to do the paperwork and be done with it.
Not sure how it is in Alabama, or any other state.
As I recall, a Lizard lawyer by the name of Lynn B. looked up Ohio law and disagreed with this contention, and even cited the relevant state statutes, whereupon her interlocuter admitted that he had simply taken the superfluous precaution to 'be sure." Regardless, it's that way in the vast majority of states.
There is no special pleading for special rights going on here. There is only the request for gay civil unions to convey the selfsame de facto rights and privileges that heterosexual marriages automatically convey, in exchange for heterosexual unions exclusively retaining the de jure title of marriage.
Anything less - in other words, what we have now in most of the country - is homophobically bigotrous and discriminatory. And these words aren't just bloviating logorrhea, they are fact, and their veracity is conclusively demonstrated by the empirical evidence of, in some cases, differential benefits, and in others, the complete and utter absence of the gay civil union option.
| 546 |
Salamantis Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:34:58pm |
re: #543 bosforus
He and Rush have been going back and forth for a while now. I'm not exactly sure he's the best person from which to get an objective point of view on the subject.
Oh yeah; Rush is SOOO much more objective...
///from here to the moon.
| 547 |
gulfloafer Tue, Jul 28, 2009 9:48:04pm |
re: #234 HoosierHoops
What's your issue? Did I say Powell voted for Obama because of the color of his skin? No. I'm saying Powell's full of shit. He portrays himself as a level headed moderate then turns around endorses the farthest of the left senators for POTUS.
| 548 |
victor_yugo Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:07:07pm |
re: #545 Salamantis
As I recall, a Lizard lawyer by the name of Lynn B. looked up Ohio law and disagreed with this contention, and even cited the relevant state statutes, whereupon her interlocuter admitted that he had simply taken the superfluous precaution to 'be sure."
I'll take these words at face value. I'm only speaking based on the advice of my attorney, who suggested I draw up a will based on my own circumstances.
| 550 |
Spartacus50 Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:16:32pm |
Powell and McCain have always been the go-to guys for any talking head show due to their milquetoast political viewpoints. They consistently get steamrolled by liberals
| 551 |
ladycatnip Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:23:21pm |
| 552 |
bosforus Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:29:43pm |
re: #546 Salamantis
Oh yeah; Rush is SOOO much more objective...
///from here to the moon.
Ha ha. Trust me, I wasn't saying he is.
| 553 |
ladycatnip Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:35:24pm |
#535 Salamantis
Why should gay partners have to go to the additional time, trouble and expense of doing what marriage does automatically? Why can't gay civil unions do this?
And it's not just inheritance issues, it's mutual medical decision issues, spousal employment benefit issues, family medical insurance coverage issues, tax issues...there are sooo many things that marriage does automatically.
Hi Sal,
Here in sunny CA (and maybe elsewhere) a friend/partner can be given specific powers of attorney to have a say in the matters you mention. Also most of the employee unions, county, city and state employees, Disney, AT&T, the entire Hollywood industry - all have domestic partner benefits.
Being married, I still had to go through all the expense and time-consuming trust/will, 5 wishes, etc. IIRC, gay unions are no different. But then, CA is pretty progressive in this area.
| 554 |
SFGoth Tue, Jul 28, 2009 10:39:36pm |
Boy, when all you got left is the name, that's some pretty strong reason to oppose gay marriage.
re: #535 Salamantis
Why should gay partners have to go to the additional time, trouble and expense of doing what marriage does automatically? Why can't gay civil unions do this?
And it's not just inheritance issues, it's mutual medical decision issues, spousal employment benefit issues, family medical insurance coverage issues, tax issues...there are sooo many things that marriage does automatically. And to be nondiscriminatory and not a symbol of second-class citizenship, gay civil unions should do all of the same things automatically, as well.
Isn't that fair compensation and a reasonable compromise for yielding on the name?
| 555 |
el polacko Tue, Jul 28, 2009 11:10:24pm |
this semantic argument drives me bonkers. what gay people want IS civil marriage/civil union/marriage. it's all the same thing. nobody is demanding religious ceremonies.. although they are available from many churches... we are talking about equality under the LAW. regardless of whatever religious ceremony hetero couples may or may not have, they still have to register with the state.. which is exactly what homo couples want and deserve as equal citizens. when a hetero couple is 'civilly-unioned' by a justice of the peace we say they are 'married', as evidenced by their 'marriage license'. there's no "re-definition".. it's the SAME THING. all this quibbling over terms is just a sadly desperate effort to insure that, somehow or other, gay relationships will be considered 'less than' str8 relationships. it's insulting and un-american.
| 556 |
SixDegrees Tue, Jul 28, 2009 11:34:09pm |
Odd to see the vitriol being heaped on Powell here, when just hours ago he was being roundly praised for condemning Gates' behavior toward police, who Powell said were to be respected and obeyed when performing their duties. Not to mention Powell's professed disappointment with 0bama's Presidency.
| 557 |
SixDegrees Tue, Jul 28, 2009 11:40:11pm |
re: #555 el polacko
this semantic argument drives me bonkers. what gay people want IS civil marriage/civil union/marriage. it's all the same thing. nobody is demanding religious ceremonies.. although they are available from many churches... we are talking about equality under the LAW. regardless of whatever religious ceremony hetero couples may or may not have, they still have to register with the state.. which is exactly what homo couples want and deserve as equal citizens. when a hetero couple is 'civilly-unioned' by a justice of the peace we say they are 'married', as evidenced by their 'marriage license'. there's no "re-definition".. it's the SAME THING. all this quibbling over terms is just a sadly desperate effort to insure that, somehow or other, gay relationships will be considered 'less than' str8 relationships. it's insulting and un-american.
I have to agree with this. My solution is extremely simple: just rename the thing the state does and stop calling it "marriage"; as far as the state is concerned, the licenses it grants would be civil unions no matter who they were given to. If you want a "marriage," go get one at a church, and let their doctrine decide whether you'll be granted one. This changes nothing at all except the labeling and the extension of the state-sponsored contract between adults to include couples of the same sex.
Using the term "marriage" for the contract honored by the state seems to be the incendiary issue here; just call it what it effectively already is, and extend it to all consenting adults.
| 558 |
SixDegrees Tue, Jul 28, 2009 11:48:18pm |
re: #535 Salamantis
Why should gay partners have to go to the additional time, trouble and expense of doing what marriage does automatically? Why can't gay civil unions do this?
And it's not just inheritance issues, it's mutual medical decision issues, spousal employment benefit issues, family medical insurance coverage issues, tax issues...there are sooo many things that marriage does automatically. And to be nondiscriminatory and not a symbol of second-class citizenship, gay civil unions should do all of the same things automatically, as well.
Isn't that fair compensation and a reasonable compromise for yielding on the name?
Correct. And to be more blunt than in my post just above: the state should stop granting "marriages" to anyone, call the contracts they do offer "civil unions" or some such, and extend their use to all consenting adults. If you want a marriage, go to the church of your choice, which may or may not grant you one depending on their particular doctrinal outlook. The state- and church-granted instruments are two entirely different things, and much of the inflammation arises from the artificial conflation of the two.
This wouldn't instantly eliminate the inequalities you mention, but most if not all of them would collapse in short order following the extension of this legal contract, and many of them - inheritance, for instance - would immediately be resolved. Private contracts like medical coverage of partners would take a bit longer, but not much longer; the threat of discrimination backed by state sanction would take care of those in a hurry.
| 559 |
Salamantis Wed, Jul 29, 2009 1:29:25am |
Most people, I'll bet, didn't know that, in the US, the state has only been in the marriage business less than a century and a half. And do you know why they got into it? To enforce laws passed against miscegenation (race-mixing), by officially certifying that the prospective bride and groom were of the same race, and legally prohibiting their marriage if it turned out that they weren't.
| 560 |
SixDegrees Wed, Jul 29, 2009 1:48:24am |
re: #559 Salamantis
Most people, I'll bet, didn't know that, in the US, the state has only been in the marriage business less than a century and a half. And do you know why they got into it? To enforce laws passed against miscegenation (race-mixing), by officially certifying that the prospective bride and groom were of the same race, and legally prohibiting their marriage if it turned out that they weren't.
Interesting; I wasn't aware of that.
| 561 |
finallyhere Wed, Jul 29, 2009 3:49:03am |
To believe that Powell publicly endorsed completely unqualified Obama leave alone Obama's other qualities, against his life time friend McCain not because of skin color is to believe that Powell is stupid. Of course he betrayed his friend and GOP and harmed the USA by that move regardless of his motives.
| 562 |
jimbouie Wed, Jul 29, 2009 3:51:40am |
re: #94 Killgore Trout
Limbaugh: Obama Laying Groundwork for Third Term
It's just crazy talk. He's a loon.
What the hell are you talking about? How is he a loon when there's this from your own quoted article:
"Upon Obama's taking office, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., introduced legislation in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two consecutive terms or 10 years in office."
Jeez.
| 563 |
neoconundrum Wed, Jul 29, 2009 4:18:48am |
I agree with Rush over 95% of the time. Sean Hannity too.
I don't have to agree with someone 100% of the time. How realistic is that? And unlike the Paulians, Rush is not "afraid" to support Israel.
And whether they're evil creationists or not, that isn't a major issue with me.
Go Rush.
| 564 |
SixDegrees Wed, Jul 29, 2009 4:56:51am |
re: #562 jimbouie
What the hell are you talking about? How is he a loon when there's this from your own quoted article:
"Upon Obama's taking office, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., introduced legislation in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two consecutive terms or 10 years in office."
Jeez.
Uh- Serrano has introduced the same bill every two years since 1997. Similar proposals have been introduced 21 times over the last 20 years.
I'm not seeing any shadowy attempt on 0's part to end-run the Constitution here.
| 565 |
Korla Pundit Wed, Jul 29, 2009 6:13:02am |
> Maybe he couldn't stomach Sarah Palin. I agree he and McCain are a perfect match but a lot of (myself included) just couldn't pull the lever for a ticket with Palin on it. I'm convinced she lost the election for the Republicans.
Yes, so the logical choice was to vote for Obama for actual President, who had less experience than Palin, and Joe Biden of course.
Very logical.
I don't buy it. It is the elites on the GOP who identify too much with the dinner-party statists, and who are so repulsed by the prole six-pack core, who have destroyed the GOP. People like Powell, people like McCain's entourage, they spend their time badmouthing people who dislike big government, runaway spending, high taxes and the politics of victimhood. At the same time, they embrace socialist dreck like nationalized healthcare and illegal immigration amnesty, etc.
And they talk as if they are the saviors of conservative ideals. They talk about "big tents," but all they go on about is excluding people like Rush and Cheney and their millions of supporters.
See, I don't care if "my party" wins a majority or not if that party is just going to legislate like the other party. I would in fact rather have independents, REAL independents gain more power, and enact the policies that will keep this country safe, strong and prosperous.
Colin Powell can go to heck for all I care. I don't want that clown in my tent.
| 566 |
zzzzzzzzzz..... Wed, Jul 29, 2009 6:18:11am |
This guy is a liberal wenie...He is not a conservative at all
| 567 |
S'latch Wed, Jul 29, 2009 7:04:22am |
Colin Powell has exactly zero credibility with me. He said he wanted a moderate Republican candidate in 2008, then he choose Obama over McCain.
Colin Powell is not an honest person.
| 568 |
Pickles Wed, Jul 29, 2009 7:29:18am |
If the GOP is afraid of Rush, it's their own fault. The GOP has not done well with consistent and clear messages and ideas that are common sense and distinguish them from the Dems. Folks like Rush have established their own opinions and have been broadcasting them for years. The fact that the GOP seems to have the deer in the headlights aura hasn't helped. I think Powell is right, but this late in the game the horse is out of the barn. The GOP ignored a large number of people out there and did nothing about it. Nature abhors a vacuum as they say, and this is the natural result.
| 569 |
SFGoth Wed, Jul 29, 2009 7:37:52am |
re: #562 jimbouie
What the hell are you talking about? How is he a loon when there's this from your own quoted article:
"Upon Obama's taking office, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., introduced legislation in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two consecutive terms or 10 years in office."
Jeez.
That does explain Obama's passion for Zelaya.
| 570 |
scullymj Wed, Jul 29, 2009 7:38:15am |
For a "Republican", Mr. Powell seemed very at ease with that liberal twit Larry King and King with him. I'm just sayin' . . .
| 571 |
tatterdemalian Wed, Jul 29, 2009 7:46:19am |
I see no problem with fearing Rush Limbaugh. In the world of politics fanboys and fangirls are your greatest weapons, and those who wield them in the greatest numbers can decide the winners of elections, even ones they don't personally participate in.
Any sane man who recognizes that popularity is the one true power in the world would fear Rush, but should at least reserve more fear for the Baby Boomers that still constitute a demographic majority, and whose desperate determination to live forever will lead them into all kinds of disastrous decisions, with the entire country dragged along for the ride.
| 572 |
abbyadams Wed, Jul 29, 2009 8:03:03am |
re: #35 Korla PunditHe's had his moment, and he voted with his skin.
What is your reason for Larry Pressler, Bill Weld, Chris Buckley, etc.?
I'm with those that think Powell voted for who he thought was the better candidate.
| 573 |
rumcrook Wed, Jul 29, 2009 8:42:30am |
the gop's afraid of rush??
me too! I wake up afraid of rush and go to sleep afraid of rush.
im also afraid of rabbits... ...but I keep a holy hand grenade close by at all times... ///
| 574 |
quiet man Wed, Jul 29, 2009 10:32:51am |
Powell should be afraid of anyone who calls him out for what he is on the national stage.
| 575 |
Sacred Plants Wed, Jul 29, 2009 11:41:17am |
This guy is an ad salesman and just that.
When people are afraid of salesmen something is wrong with the markets.
| 576 |
korla pundit Wed, Jul 29, 2009 1:00:46pm |
> What is your reason for Larry Pressler, Bill Weld, Chris Buckley, etc.?
They had an even worse reason: they were being cutesy. They want attention. They were bigger than all that. And they didn't really give a damn about what Obama was going to do (and is now doing) to this country, and by extension to this world.
> I'm with those that think Powell voted for who he thought was the better candidate.
I call BS. Powell knew exactly what Obama was. But when it started becoming apparent, more quickly than anybody feared, what a ROTTEN President Barack really is, what an arrogant, incompetent, inexperienced, and non-post-racial amateur he is proving to be, Powell wants to shift the blame for his vote to the GOP. "Look what you made me do!"
However, let me recalibrate what I said about voting with ones skin. I mean it in the same way that well meaning former liberals felt compelled to vote for a nonwhite. The whole ridiculous notion of a "historic" Presidency was too hard to resist for people who had lived through the Civil Rights Movement. It promised to be some kind of culmination. Some kind of closure to the ugly history of racism, bla bla bla.
I could understand falling for it if you couldn't see past Obama's facade of "moderation" and his Potempkin post-racialism. If you never heard the speeches he sat through for 20 years at his "church." If you were unaware of his close relationship to Bill Ayers. If you relied on the mainstream media, and never heard of the New Party, or ACORN, or Blagojevich or Rezko. But if you knew all this, and you still voted for some kind of master of racial healing and beacon of fiscal responsibility, then you were a willing dupe.
That's Powell.
This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.
Comments are closed.
Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds
- Featured PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
1 weeks ago
Views: 777 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ... Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 1,329 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 3
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 431 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1- Pictures From Today’s Exhibition of Paintings Done by Jane LilienthalPROPS TO MICHELE AND SAGEHEN FOR CATCHING THE SPELLING ERROR IN THE TITLE THAT MY DIABETIC EYES COULDN'T CATCH I wanted to share pictures of the art show I visited today. The portraits were created by the mother of my ...Joe Bacon ✅
3 weeks ago
Views: 500 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 11 
March FavoritesYou've seen these all already but looking back, just because. These are my favorite shots of this last month. That 1937 Zeiss Sonnar is such a gloriously wonderful bit of glass. Thanks for looking.
William Lewis
4 weeks ago
Views: 621 • Comments: 2 • Rating: 9
Russia’s New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka When we landed on the moon, I thought about how science fiction had become real. Now, the robot wars have begun. It's more poignant somehow on the ground than in the missile wars we have in the air as ...
Rightwingconspirator
4 weeks ago
Views: 602 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 5
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ... Cheechako
4 weeks ago
Views: 604 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 5- A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...KGxvi
4 weeks ago
Views: 487 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 4
- Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ... Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 132 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ... Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 296 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
