or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Senate has sold out the People
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Senate has sold out the People

post #1 of 128
Thread Starter 
This immigration bill is horrible. It will ruin and bankrupt America. We can only hope that the house blows this thing out of the water. The Senate and the President have sold out the people. We need strong. Conservative leadership in Washington and we need it now. Our country has been turned over the dictator of Mexico. He runs the US, our elected President.

"tremendous hidden costs of the bill, including the $500 billion in additional welfare payments it will cost American taxpayers in the period 10 to 20 years after its passage."


http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=15165
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #2 of 128
Quote:
We need strong. Conservative leadership in Washington and we need it now.

The conservatives control the House, the Senate, and the White House. We do need change, and we do need it now, but the conservatives have blown it.
post #3 of 128
No, no, Fran, it's the New Thinking:

Since the Bush admin and the rubber stamp Congress have proven to be such manifest failures, it now necessary to declare them "not really conservative".

This is to set the groundwork for the '08 presidential election, where a "true conservative" standard bearer can emerge and pretend like the previous 8 years were ruined by "liberalism".
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #4 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
No, no, Fran, it's the New Thinking:

Since the Bush admin and the rubber stamp Congress have proven to be such manifest failures, it now necessary to declare them "not really conservative".

This is to set the groundwork for the '08 presidential election, where a "true conservative" standard bearer can emerge and pretend like the previous 8 years were ruined by "liberalism".




The scary thing is I'm sure some actually think this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #5 of 128
Thread Starter 
It's the truth.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #6 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by southside grabowski
It's the truth.

Uh right........

Who's been in charge all this time?

I don't buy it And I don't think anyone else will.


The conservatives have had their day in the sun ( neo or not ).

Better to plan for 2012.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #7 of 128
Or 2016.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #8 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by southside grabowski
It's the truth.

Just out of curiosity, if the Republicans in power are actually liberals, why have you spent so much time defending their policies?

I would have thought you would have been denouncing their "liberalism" right along, instead of waiting until it became painfully obvious that a lot of the country has begun to notice what fuck-ups they are.

Do you actually think that people aren't going to notice what a half-assed expedient fall back this is? That after 8 years of triumphalist invective against "terror loving peace-niks" and "irrational Bush hatred" the right can get away with declaring the whole Bush fiasco an unfortunate interlude of crypto-liberalism?

I'm starting to wonder if the conservative train wreck is going to be even worse than we've imagined, once you start turing on each other like rabid cur dogs.

Maybe you'll have the chance to get a taste of being Roved and Swift-boated. Wouldn't that be fun?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #9 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Just out of curiosity, if the Republicans in power are actually liberals, why have you spent so much time defending their policies?

I would have thought you would have been denouncing their "liberalism" right along, instead of waiting until it became painfully obvious that a lot of the country has begun to notice what fuck-ups they are.

Do you actually think that people aren't going to notice what a half-assed expedient fall back this is? That after 8 years of triumphalist invective against "terror loving peace-niks" and "irrational Bush hatred" the right can get away with declaring the whole Bush fiasco an unfortunate interlude of crypto-liberalism?

I'm starting to wonder if the conservative train wreck is going to be even worse than we've imagined, once you start turing on each other like rabid cur dogs.

Maybe you'll have the chance to get a taste of being Roved and Swift-boated. Wouldn't that be fun?

I read a piece recently - I can't remember where now - that argued this whole ratcheting-up of immigration by conservatives is a ploy to distance themselves from Bush. It's hard to imagine a spontaneous conspiracy like that, but I wonder if, subconsciously at least, they knew that Bush couldn't accept their absurd positions on this (you can't really either build a 2000-mile wall or deport 12 million people, and Bush has a reputation for being a buddy of Mexico), and so they went all-out on it for strategic political reasons. It seems to fit. Where did this vehemence on immigration suddenly come from, coincidentally right when Bush hit 30%?
post #10 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Just out of curiosity, if the Republicans in power are actually liberals, why have you spent so much time defending their policies?

I would have thought you would have been denouncing their "liberalism" right along, instead of waiting until it became painfully obvious that a lot of the country has begun to notice what fuck-ups they are.

Do you actually think that people aren't going to notice what a half-assed expedient fall back this is? That after 8 years of triumphalist invective against "terror loving peace-niks" and "irrational Bush hatred" the right can get away with declaring the whole Bush fiasco an unfortunate interlude of crypto-liberalism?

I'm starting to wonder if the conservative train wreck is going to be even worse than we've imagined, once you start turing on each other like rabid cur dogs.

Maybe you'll have the chance to get a taste of being Roved and Swift-boated. Wouldn't that be fun?

Conservatives are not running the country, my friend. Why do you think Bush's numbers are so low...and those of Congress? It's what I've been saying: The polls are at records lows because of disaffected conservatives. They don't like the liberal policies of the modern Republican party. The problem is they have no alternative. Democrats are even more liberal, and more out of touch on security issues.

By the way, I've been complaining about Republican policies quite a bit. Immigration. Spending. Government Expansion...they're all things I've pointed out. But where do I go with my vote?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #11 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Conservatives are not running the country, my friend. Why do you think Bush's numbers are so low...and those of Congress? It's what I've been saying: The polls are at records lows because of disaffected conservatives. They don't like the liberal policies of the modern Republican party. The problem is they have no alternative. Democrats are even more liberal, and more out of touch on security issues.

By the way, I've been complaining about Republican policies quite a bit. Immigration. Spending. Government Expansion...they're all things I've pointed out. But where do I go with my vote?


With all due respect, the "disaffected conservatives" thing is bullshit.

As long as Bush was riding high in his jodhpurs and riding crop, attending to his photo ops atop rubble heaps, none of his "liberal" policies seemed to cause his supporters any trouble.

I mean, he has been running up record deficits, mucking about in other countries, vastly expanding the federal government, packing agencies with ill-qualified cronies and building a secret surveillance appartus for the last five years, so what's changed?

Court appointees not conservative enough? Hasn't personally rammed through an anti-gay marriage amendment? Didn't completely eliminate taxes? Hasn't made Haliburton a federal agency? Failed to clear cut every remaining forest in America?

Don't tell me it's his immigration policies, because that has very obviously been pushed to the fore as a political football exactly because of shitty Republican polling numbers. Trying to use that as "why conservatives are breaking ranks with Bush" as this point is laughable.

The fact is, as long a being part of the "modern Republican party" was fun, with Bush looking invincible and screaming pundits denouncing liberal fellow travelers from every street corner, it was all good, and the polls bear that out.

I mean, ideology be damned as long as there's another Dixie Chick CD burning party to go to and "Nascar moms" got to stick it to those coastal elites, right?

We've just come through an orgy of divisive cultural hate mongering designed to obscure the wretched performance of this administration and a Republican party built to deliver swag, not govern, and the right went for it hook, line and sinker.

And now, now that it's the morning after and the bonfires are dying down and the revelers are noticing how everything kinda.....sucks.........now ya'll have suddenly reacquired your precious conservative "principles"? All of a sudden Mr. "doesn't he look hot in that flight suit" gets kicked out of bed? Now that "Freedom is on the March" is a tattered, beer and vomit soaked banner lying on the floor with the cigarette butts and party favors, now it's time solemnly pledge to go on the wagon, and that you never really liked "those kind of people" anyway?

Guess what? You made a deal-- Bush and the Republicans do whatever it takes to consolidate power and heap approbation on the people you've been taught to resent, and you wave your torches when called upon to do so and politely look the other way as they wreck the country.

And now you want out, now that the wreckage is piling up around your ears.

Bullshit.

And by the way, for someone who has so many long standing grievances with "the modern Republican party", how is it that you can always be relied on to defend their every move, as long as "liberals" are against it?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #12 of 128
I'm fine with the whole "workaday Republican citizens aren't happy with Republican politicians", but what the hell is this drivel?
Quote:
They don't like the liberal policies of the modern Republican party.

What?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #13 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat


What?

It's really quite simple.

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #14 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
It's what I've been saying: The polls are at records lows because of disaffected conservatives.

Not really. Here's the latest Fox News poll. Yes, approval among Republicans is down from a steady 95% to 71%. But Bush's overall ratings are in the tank because only 13% of Dems and 24% of independents approve. If it were really disaffected Republicans driving him down to 35%, you'd expect 1. Rather less than a 3.5:1 approval:disapproval among Republicans and 2. Independents to fall in the middle, rather than disapproving almost as overwhelmingly as Dems.

What really drove him down in the last 6 months is that independents/centrists finally and utterly lost faith and deserted him. His Dem numbers have always been terrible, and Reps are still mostly standing fast. But independents have gone from roughly 50/50 to overwhelmingly disapproving. It's incredible, if you look at that Fox News poll, how independents' responses across a wide range of issues and opinions now almost perfectly parallel Dems.
post #15 of 128
There is only 1 answer and that is to vote out every republican, i say that as a former republican now independent. The Republican Party is on another agenda and that is corporations replacing all liberty and freedom in our country. Get registered and vote out these clowns.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #16 of 128
addabox:

With all due respect, the "disaffected conservatives" thing is bullshit.

Then how do youexplain the poll numbers? It's conservatives and to a certain extent, moderates. It's not liberals, who wouldn't vote for Bush...pardon the cliche..."no matter what he did"



As long as Bush was riding high in his jodhpurs and riding crop, attending to his photo ops atop rubble heaps, none of his "liberal" policies seemed to cause his supporters any trouble.

Disagree, hence his numbers. The question is whether or not that translates into voting for someone else. In 2004, answer was no. In 2006? I'm not so sure. I still don't see a good alternative to say the least, so I'm most likely voting Republican for most races this fall, perhaps with some exception.

I mean, he has been running up record deficits, mucking about in other countries, vastly expanding the federal government, packing agencies with ill-qualified cronies and building a secret surveillance appartus for the last five years, so what's changed?

Several things. Iraq is now drawn out, which some conseratives don't like. Most realize it's necessity, hence only some drop in the poll numbers amongst conservatives on that issue. The federal expansion has never been something we as conservatives have agreed with, but in the wake of terrorism and war, we've dealt with it. Now it's becoming an issue, as we've loaned out a lot of trust with regard to Iraq. The account is starting to dry up. As for packing agencies with ill-qualified cronies, I firmly disagree that's even happening, at least not more than it has been in previous administrations. Ditto on the "secret surveillance aparatus," which I support on its merits. Immigration is not a new issue, but it seems its come to a head and many conservatives don't like where Bush and Senate Republicans are on it.

Court appointees not conservative enough? Hasn't personally rammed through an anti-gay marriage amendment? Didn't completely eliminate taxes? Hasn't made Haliburton a federal agency? Failed to clear cut every remaining forest in America?

Conservatives didn't want Harriet Miers, now did they? Most support the two confirmed justices, I agree. The gay marriage amendment is actually not all that popular except with religous conservatives, so he loses some of the fiscal conservative base with that. True conservatives want a flat tax or other full-out reform, not just cuts. In light of huge federal spending, people want reform on both the spending and revenue sides. Haliburton is not an issue, and I won't engage in your hysterics concerning it. Forests are not an issue, though I will say that you're delibrately mischaracterizing the administration's position on it.

Don't tell me it's his immigration policies, because that has very obviously been pushed to the fore as a political football exactly because of shitty Republican polling numbers. Trying to use that as "why conservatives are breaking ranks with Bush" as this point is laughable.

That's stupid. Mainstream conseravatives are furious with our immigration policies. But again, where is the alternative?

The fact is, as long a being part of the "modern Republican party" was fun, with Bush looking invincible and screaming pundits denouncing liberal fellow travelers from every street corner, it was all good, and the polls bear that out.

I mean, ideology be damned as long as there's another Dixie Chick CD burning party to go to and "Nascar moms" got to stick it to those coastal elites, right?

Wait...you're saying that Bush's poll numbers are down because it's not fun to be a conservative? Interesting, since you don't seem to think it's conservatives that are at the heart of Bush's numbers. Which is it? In addition do you not see the elitism contained within your statement? I mean, these Nascar Dads and Soccer Moms must be pretty stupid. [crying hysterically] IT WAS ALL A LIE! A LIE![/crying hysterically]. The irony is amazing.

We've just come through an orgy of divisive cultural hate mongering designed to obscure the wretched performance of this administration and a Republican party built to deliver swag, not govern, and the right went for it hook, line and sinker.

Hate mongering? What is it with the left and accusing Republicans of "hating?" Why is it that you can't see conservatives are happy with Bush on some front, unhappy with him on others, and not sure where else there is to go right now with their vote? Oh, wait! Because we're sheep! I forgot.

And now, now that it's the morning after and the bonfires are dying down and the revelers are noticing how everything kinda.....sucks.........now ya'll have suddenly reacquired your precious conservative "principles"? All of a sudden Mr. "doesn't he look hot in that flight suit" gets kicked out of bed? Now that "Freedom is on the March" is a tattered, beer and vomit soaked banner lying on the floor with the cigarette butts and party favors, now it's time solemnly pledge to go on the wagon, and that you never really liked "those kind of people" anyway?

Everything kinda sucks? Hmm. That's interesting. The economy is booming. We haven't been attacked in 5 years. Saddam is in jail...he's not cutting out tongues and setting up rape rooms and filling mass graves, the Taliban are out of power, Iraq is on the path to Democracy, taxes are lower for the middle class, unemployment is lower than the historical average for the last 40 years. How is it that "everything sucks?" We're not happy about overall spending, immigration and gas prices. We'd also like to see more progess in Iraq, like everyone else. But you just can't believe that, can you?

Guess what? You made a deal-- Bush and the Republicans do whatever it takes to consolidate power and heap approbation on the people you've been taught to resent, and you wave your torches when called upon to do so and politely look the other way as they wreck the country.

And now you want out, now that the wreckage is piling up around your ears.

Bullshit.

I see. I voted for Republicans, and now I'm supposed to agree with them on every single issue. I'm also supposed to accept that they've "wrecked the country," which is bullshit in itself. I guess I should remember that I'm a sheep in your eyes, so it's impossible for me to actually critically think about any issue.

And by the way, for someone who has so many long standing grievances with "the modern Republican party", how is it that you can always be relied on to defend their every move, as long as "liberals" are against it?

I have not defended their every move. I have opposed lack of immigration enforcement, the medicare bill, the multitude of current entitlement programs, overall spending, lack of good energy policy, etc. I've also said I wanted more troops for the Iraq invasion and that I want to see things move more quickly there.

I have said so many times, but the fact of the matter is you and yours don't listen. It's much easier to paint me and any other conservative on this board as a right wing wack-a-doo. Meanwhile, you get to come out and oppose every single stance the Republicans take, attribute sinister motives to every single move, mischaracterize positions, call the President a liar and a big oil whore, call Republicans "hate filled hating haters," and be on your way...all while supporting each and every ridiculous move and statement by the Democratic party.

Who is the sheep here?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #17 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
Not really. Here's the latest Fox News poll. Yes, approval among Republicans is down from a steady 95% to 71%. But Bush's overall ratings are in the tank because only 13% of Dems and 24% of independents approve. If it were really disaffected Republicans driving him down to 35%, you'd expect 1. Rather less than a 3.5:1 approval:disapproval among Republicans and 2. Independents to fall in the middle, rather than disapproving almost as overwhelmingly as Dems.

What really drove him down in the last 6 months is that independents/centrists finally and utterly lost faith and deserted him. His Dem numbers have always been terrible, and Reps are still mostly standing fast. But independents have gone from roughly 50/50 to overwhelmingly disapproving. It's incredible, if you look at that Fox News poll, how independents' responses across a wide range of issues and opinions now almost perfectly parallel Dems.

That's one poll. And he's taken a 25% hit in terms of Republicans. I stand by my statment. If conservatives were back on the ranch, he'd be in the mid forties to 50%.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #18 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
There is only 1 answer and that is to vote out every republican, i say that as a former republican now independent. The Republican Party is on another agenda and that is corporations replacing all liberty and freedom in our country. Get registered and vote out these clowns.

That's hysterical.

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #19 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Conservatives are not running the country, my friend. Why do you think Bush's numbers are so low...and those of Congress? It's what I've been saying: The polls are at records lows because of disaffected conservatives. They don't like the liberal policies of the modern Republican party. The problem is they have no alternative. Democrats are even more liberal, and more out of touch on security issues.

By the way, I've been complaining about Republican policies quite a bit. Immigration. Spending. Government Expansion...they're all things I've pointed out. But where do I go with my vote?


" To everything spin, spin, spin "

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #20 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
addabox:

With all due respect, the "disaffected conservatives" thing is bullshit.

Then how do youexplain the poll numbers? It's conservatives and to a certain extent, moderates. It's not liberals, who wouldn't vote for Bush...pardon the cliche..."no matter what he did"



As long as Bush was riding high in his jodhpurs and riding crop, attending to his photo ops atop rubble heaps, none of his "liberal" policies seemed to cause his supporters any trouble.

Disagree, hence his numbers. The question is whether or not that translates into voting for someone else. In 2004, answer was no. In 2006? I'm not so sure. I still don't see a good alternative to say the least, so I'm most likely voting Republican for most races this fall, perhaps with some exception.

I mean, he has been running up record deficits, mucking about in other countries, vastly expanding the federal government, packing agencies with ill-qualified cronies and building a secret surveillance appartus for the last five years, so what's changed?

Several things. Iraq is now drawn out, which some conseratives don't like. Most realize it's necessity, hence only some drop in the poll numbers amongst conservatives on that issue. The federal expansion has never been something we as conservatives have agreed with, but in the wake of terrorism and war, we've dealt with it. Now it's becoming an issue, as we've loaned out a lot of trust with regard to Iraq. The account is starting to dry up. As for packing agencies with ill-qualified cronies, I firmly disagree that's even happening, at least not more than it has been in previous administrations. Ditto on the "secret surveillance aparatus," which I support on its merits. Immigration is not a new issue, but it seems its come to a head and many conservatives don't like where Bush and Senate Republicans are on it.

Court appointees not conservative enough? Hasn't personally rammed through an anti-gay marriage amendment? Didn't completely eliminate taxes? Hasn't made Haliburton a federal agency? Failed to clear cut every remaining forest in America?

Conservatives didn't want Harriet Miers, now did they? Most support the two confirmed justices, I agree. The gay marriage amendment is actually not all that popular except with religous conservatives, so he loses some of the fiscal conservative base with that. True conservatives want a flat tax or other full-out reform, not just cuts. In light of huge federal spending, people want reform on both the spending and revenue sides. Haliburton is not an issue, and I won't engage in your hysterics concerning it. Forests are not an issue, though I will say that you're delibrately mischaracterizing the administration's position on it.

Don't tell me it's his immigration policies, because that has very obviously been pushed to the fore as a political football exactly because of shitty Republican polling numbers. Trying to use that as "why conservatives are breaking ranks with Bush" as this point is laughable.

That's stupid. Mainstream conseravatives are furious with our immigration policies. But again, where is the alternative?

The fact is, as long a being part of the "modern Republican party" was fun, with Bush looking invincible and screaming pundits denouncing liberal fellow travelers from every street corner, it was all good, and the polls bear that out.

I mean, ideology be damned as long as there's another Dixie Chick CD burning party to go to and "Nascar moms" got to stick it to those coastal elites, right?

Wait...you're saying that Bush's poll numbers are down because it's not fun to be a conservative? Interesting, since you don't seem to think it's conservatives that are at the heart of Bush's numbers. Which is it? In addition do you not see the elitism contained within your statement? I mean, these Nascar Dads and Soccer Moms must be pretty stupid. [crying hysterically] IT WAS ALL A LIE! A LIE![/crying hysterically]. The irony is amazing.

We've just come through an orgy of divisive cultural hate mongering designed to obscure the wretched performance of this administration and a Republican party built to deliver swag, not govern, and the right went for it hook, line and sinker.

Hate mongering? What is it with the left and accusing Republicans of "hating?" Why is it that you can't see conservatives are happy with Bush on some front, unhappy with him on others, and not sure where else there is to go right now with their vote? Oh, wait! Because we're sheep! I forgot.

And now, now that it's the morning after and the bonfires are dying down and the revelers are noticing how everything kinda.....sucks.........now ya'll have suddenly reacquired your precious conservative "principles"? All of a sudden Mr. "doesn't he look hot in that flight suit" gets kicked out of bed? Now that "Freedom is on the March" is a tattered, beer and vomit soaked banner lying on the floor with the cigarette butts and party favors, now it's time solemnly pledge to go on the wagon, and that you never really liked "those kind of people" anyway?

Everything kinda sucks? Hmm. That's interesting. The economy is booming. We haven't been attacked in 5 years. Saddam is in jail...he's not cutting out tongues and setting up rape rooms and filling mass graves, the Taliban are out of power, Iraq is on the path to Democracy, taxes are lower for the middle class, unemployment is lower than the historical average for the last 40 years. How is it that "everything sucks?" We're not happy about overall spending, immigration and gas prices. We'd also like to see more progess in Iraq, like everyone else. But you just can't believe that, can you?

Guess what? You made a deal-- Bush and the Republicans do whatever it takes to consolidate power and heap approbation on the people you've been taught to resent, and you wave your torches when called upon to do so and politely look the other way as they wreck the country.

And now you want out, now that the wreckage is piling up around your ears.

Bullshit.

I see. I voted for Republicans, and now I'm supposed to agree with them on every single issue. I'm also supposed to accept that they've "wrecked the country," which is bullshit in itself. I guess I should remember that I'm a sheep in your eyes, so it's impossible for me to actually critically think about any issue.

And by the way, for someone who has so many long standing grievances with "the modern Republican party", how is it that you can always be relied on to defend their every move, as long as "liberals" are against it?

I have not defended their every move. I have opposed lack of immigration enforcement, the medicare bill, the multitude of current entitlement programs, overall spending, lack of good energy policy, etc. I've also said I wanted more troops for the Iraq invasion and that I want to see things move more quickly there.

I have said so many times, but the fact of the matter is you and yours don't listen. It's much easier to paint me and any other conservative on this board as a right wing wack-a-doo. Meanwhile, you get to come out and oppose every single stance the Republicans take, attribute sinister motives to every single move, mischaracterize positions, call the President a liar and a big oil whore, call Republicans "hate filled hating haters," and be on your way...all while supporting each and every ridiculous move and statement by the Democratic party.



Who is the sheep here?


Can you say Bahhhhhhhaa?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #21 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
That's hysterical.


I'm sure. However it's what the people are thinking SDW.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #22 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Fran441
The conservatives control the House, the Senate, and the White House. We do need change, and we do need it now, but the conservatives have blown it.

Isnt that the truth, no matter what they run its a mess. Throw out all the lifetimers and lets get a Senate who represents the folks and not the megacorporations. Americans are getting tired of the constant screwing by the spend,spend,spend republican party and the blind to the people Senate. Simply put this Senate Sucks.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #23 of 128
SDW, please never, ever do the red ink thing again. It's one thing to try to convince people to accept an opinion, and another to blind them for life.

As a (conservative) non-American, my take on this is that there are a lot of people ticked at Bush for a lot of different reasons. The anti-war crowd thinks it's because everyone agrees with them, but in fact there are a bunch of things that have converged.

Conservatives are ticked primarily because of the nation's finances. The war effort has affected the nation's purse, but not as much as the seemingly corrupt budget process. The last big bill I remember (Highways?) had a whole bunch of expensive, irrelevant stuff tacked on to appease local constituencies. A strong leader would have stood up and forced all that nonsense to be cut in a time of war. Bush did not.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #24 of 128
Exactly SDW. It's a convergence of things.

One mistake resting on another mistake.

The house of cards is starting come down SDW.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #25 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777
SDW, please never, ever do the red ink thing again. It's one thing to try to convince people to accept an opinion, and another to blind them for life.

As a (conservative) non-American, my take on this is that there are a lot of people ticked at Bush for a lot of different reasons. The anti-war crowd thinks it's because everyone agrees with them, but in fact there are a bunch of things that have converged.

Conservatives are ticked primarily because of the nation's finances. The war effort has affected the nation's purse, but not as much as the seemingly corrupt budget process. The last big bill I remember (Highways?) had a whole bunch of expensive, irrelevant stuff tacked on to appease local constituencies. A strong leader would have stood up and forced all that nonsense to be cut in a time of war. Bush did not.

But, again, the things that might plausibly offend conservative voters as a matter of principle have been going on since Bush's poll numbers were sky high amongst those very conservatives, so what's changed?

I say the things that have "converged" aren't examples of Bush straying from the faith, because he never had faith. What he had is a blood and guts war party plus the always popular cult building technique of savagely demonizing the opposition. Those things combined to provide the right in this country with an exhilarating sense of "take no prisoners, we are by God gonna kick some ass and take some names!" It also, very obviously and consistently, preempted any claims to "conservative values"-- the point being that that was perfectly fine as long as the mob felt flush with adrenaline.

I say what's "converged" is the dawning realization that the guy is incompetent and dangerously unteachable (something a lot of us noticed all along), with the inevitable deflation of that "we will defeat the liberals and terrorists together" moment.

So it's not surprising that we have a growing number of born again sober minded fiscal moderation and small government conservatives-- they got swept up in something ugly and stupid and pointless and the country is all the worse for it. They just thought they were going to be living in a different country of their own, is all, and now that it turns out we're all in here together they are obliged to do anything they can to distance themselves from the mess they've made.

Which if fine and human nature and all, but that doesn't mean we have to confuse ass covering with principles.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #26 of 128
I would suggest that what changed was Katrina.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #27 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I would suggest that what changed was Katrina.

Pretty much.

The whole Rovian machine of "energize the base with wedge issues/manipulate the news cycle/message discipline/Swift Boat the opposition/photo op/photo op/ sound bite/photo op" kind of obviously lacks a critical component: any interest in governance.

Iraq has made that clear all along, of course, but until recently is was possible to use the blunt instrument of 9/11 to obscure that fact.

Katrina laid bare the emptiness and disinterest behind the rhetoric, for sure, but I would also nominate the Terry Schiavo debacle as a "scales from eyes" moment, when a typically detached and vacationing Bush was all of a sudden hopping on Air Force One to get something done. That just seemed to be a "pander too far".

Plus, the seeming unending series of scandals sends the message that, yes, your Republican government has been working hard, just not on, you know, governing.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #28 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Pretty much.

The whole Rovian machine of "energize the base with wedge issues/manipulate the news cycle/message discipline/Swift Boat the opposition/photo op/photo op/ sound bite/photo op" kind of obviously lacks a critical component: any interest in governance.

Iraq has made that clear all along, of course, but until recently is was possible to use the blunt instrument of 9/11 to obscure that fact.

Katrina laid bare the emptiness and disinterest behind the rhetoric, for sure, but I would also nominate the Terry Schiavo debacle as a "scales from eyes" moment, when a typically detached and vacationing Bush was all of a sudden hopping on Air Force One to get something done. That just seemed to be a "pander too far".

Plus, the seeming unending series of scandals sends the message that, yes, your Republican government has been working hard, just not on, you know, governing.


I want to say I'm not beating my democratic drum as I'm registered independent. Having emphasized that it's something the rest of us saw a long time ago.

He hasn't looked like a good leader since before he was elected.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #29 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
I want to say I'm not beating my democratic drum as I'm registered independent. Having emphasized that it's something the rest of us saw a long time ago.

He hasn't looked like a good leader since before he was elected.

This didn't help:

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #30 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
This didn't help:


It's a bitch when the real world comes barreling over the set pieces and cardboard props, ain't it?

Not the kind of photo-op they had in mind.

Speaking 'o which, how's that fabulous new day in New Orleans coming? I seem to vaguely recall some stirring words from megaphone boy, resplendent in shirt sleeves, about commitment and seeing the job through.

But I guess that requires some interest in results, and some system in place for getting things done.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #31 of 128
Nagin: "I don't want to see anybody do anymore goddamn press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences. Don't do another press conference until the resources are in this city" Sept 1.

Bush:



Sept 15.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #32 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
Not really. Here's the latest Fox News poll. Yes, approval among Republicans is down from a steady 95% to 71%.

That's right. And the latest CBS poll had similar findings: 35% overall approval rating, 6% from Dems, 26% from Inds, and 74% of Repubs. That's 74% approval from Repubs. They still think Bush should be on Mt. Rushmore.

But I think SDW is half right: In this highly polarized time, Bush needs 95% approval of Repubs in order to have a good overall approval rating. During previous presidencies, even during the Clinton years, there wasn't this kind of divergence.

Another issue with these polls: The categories are far from static. When Bush's approval goes down, less people call themselves Republicans. So you can't just look at approval from partisans as if they were constant groups of people.
post #33 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Nagin: "I don't want to see anybody do anymore goddamn press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences. Don't do another press conference until the resources are in this city" Sept 1.

Bush:



Sept 15.

Yeah. The photo-op is the point. By the time people figure out that you didn't actually do anything (aside from line the pockets of your cronies), you can be onto the next "get out the base" wedge issue.

Oh, gee, looky there-- immigration!

By the way, I can't find the link at the moment, but did you happen to see the photo-op from Iraq (I think it was) that was set up exactly like that shot from New Orleans? Nice big white building lit up in the background to give a pleasing sense of depth to the shot of Bush, balancing the composition to one side, in the foreground.

Nothing contrived though, just spontaneous hard work Bush spontaneously talking about the spontaneous principles that guide his spontaneity.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #34 of 128
Well, it's the photo-op plus the three word phrase. You know. "Restoring America's Value." "Support Our Troops." "Flood Our Cities."

That kind of thing.

And yeah. The new wedge is immigration, which pisses me off to no end. I know there are folks like SteveNUMBEROFTHEDEVIL and all, but I just don't see how people put up with this kind of bullshit. I mean, it's Terrorism! um, Gays! um, Social Security! um, Immigration!

This will disappear by December.

I'm ready for a national campaign from the Democrats that just asks one question:

Tired of being jerked around?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #35 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
.....I'm ready for a national campaign from the Democrats that just asks one question:

Tired of being jerked around? [/B]

Absolutely.

And the answer could be: "Let's get to work"
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #36 of 128
Problem is the democrats dont seem to stand for anything and are bought and paid for by the same Corporations that have written all of Bush's policys. Neither party seems interested in the american worker tax payer.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #37 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
Problem is the democrats dont seem to stand for anything and are bought and paid for by the same Corporations that have written all of Bush's policys. Neither party seems interested in the american worker tax payer.

Bullshit. The Democats stand for seeming to stand for things. Similarly, the Republicans stand for taking strong, unequivocal stands on things. And standing on things. Like the rubble of collapsed buildings in New York or on ruined southern cities.*

--
* I"ll bet BRussell's plagiarism spidey-sense goes off.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #38 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
Problem is the democrats dont seem to stand for anything and are bought and paid for by the same Corporations that have written all of Bush's policys. Neither party seems interested in the american worker tax payer.

Well, "they all do it" has become pretty much the standard line of the Republicans, now that they are being indicted faster than we can keep up and the incompetence is busting out all over, but it's actually not true. This crowd has taken the inevitable inefficiency and corruption that taints any government and turned it into their organizing principle. Its like saying there's no use turning out murdering gangsters because the guy on the corner store overcharges for milk and it's all of a piece.

A Gore presidency, say, would not have had close ties to Enron and allowed it and other energy companies to simply write energy policy.

It is very unlikely that Gore would have invaded Iraq, because the cabal of neocons that engineered that little adventure would have had no place in his White House, and without them and political expediency, invading Iraq makes no sense whatsoever. Far more likely we would have gone into Afghanistan, post 9/11, caught bin Laden, and then stayed there long enough, with enough resources and focus, to actually make some changes in the region.

There would have been no "K Street Project" (at least not an effective one) wherein lobbyists are literally turned into Republican operatives and legislation is literally written by industry.

Since Gore is a Democrat, and Dems actually believe the government can do good things, it is likely that he would have appointed people who were qualified and had a track record of success to various government agencies, like, oh, I dunno, FEMA.

It is highly unlikely that Gore would have been running an active campaign of suppressing and attacking scientific findings that ran counter to his policies, meaning we might have actually had a chance to start to address thing like global warming and stem cell research. I doubt there would have been a lot of time expended on loopy appointees insisting that science agencies give "equal time" to creationist rhetoric.

It's not that the Dems have gotten better, it's that the Republicans have gotten so very much worse. At this point, just business as usual, low level graft and waste would look like the fucking flowering of Athenian democracy, you know?

Just staff the federal government with people who know a little something about what they're supposed to be doing, and don't do anything tragically stupid. Really, at this point, that would be plenty.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #39 of 128
I still think every American should vote out its incumbant Senator. Everyone from Kennedy to Mccain. Lets send the senators a clear message we want you gone for not representing us for years.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #40 of 128
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
I still think every American should vote out its incumbant Senator. Everyone from Kennedy to Mccain. Lets send the senators a clear message we want you gone for not representing us for years.

I know that this is a mighty popular sentiment these days, but I would suggest you take a look at California's legislature before you inflict such a thing on the entire nation.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Senate has sold out the People