RE: Why the GOP is unraveling.

RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Owner59 -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/17/2009 9:27:35 PM)
ok...nervious laugh then....

TheHeretic -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/17/2009 9:38:26 PM)
Belly-laugh, with a bit of gasping for breath and a side-ache. Lucky for me the cat wasn't sleeping on my lap. I'm surprised you aren't a tad offended at the disrespect to your efforts.

Marc2b -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/20/2009 5:27:37 PM)
quote: Except that if we had as many airline crashes as we've had corporate fraud we would all be riding trains now. Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, Madoff, Stanton, etc., etc., etc.. And those are just a handful of the most blatant, obviously criminal offenders. We can easily go on to discuss the lower-level "legal" scams like AIG taking our tax dollars to give executive bonuses and JP Morgan Chase using those same bailout dollars to purchase two new jets for its fleet. You're still using individual examples to condem an entire group. It's no different than saying some preists are pediophiles therefore all preists are pediophiles or some Muslims are terrorists therefore all Muslims are terrorists.

rulemylife -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 8:08:20 AM)
The difference being no one suggests relaxing laws against pedophiles or terrorists, but we have had numerous suggestions on these boards that we need to relax corporate regulation when it was the lack of regulation that created the potential for the crimes that occurred.

Marc2b -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 8:42:28 AM)
quote: The difference being no one suggests relaxing laws against pedophiles or terrorists, Don't be so sure about that. quote: but we have had numerous suggestions on these boards that we need to relax corporate regulation when it was the lack of regulation that created the potential for the crimes that occurred. Regulations, or the lack thereof, will have little to any impact on the human heart, on the decision to act ethically or unethically. We have regulations concerning prescription drugs but there is still a vast black market in the selling of such drugs. The only thing regulations can do is impede or impel a person’s motivations and actions – possibly! Ultimately it is up to the individual. I know of no sane person who argues for a regulation free society (by definition, such would not even be a society). I have been accused of such but people like to push their opponent’s views to the extreme in order to make them look absurd. In my view people who call for more regulation (often with out defining what those regulations should be) fail to take into account that regulations are often passed not to benefit society at large but to favor one group over another. They also often fail to realize that regulations can have unintended consequences. One example: regulations designed to protect an endangered species by restricting land use where the species is located may do more harm to said species because the landowners – not wanting to lose use of their land – adopted a shoot, shovel, and shut up “policy” whenever they find said species living on their land.

rulemylife -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 8:59:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b I know of no sane person who argues for a regulation free society (by definition, such would not even be a society). I have been accused of such but people like to push their opponent’s views to the extreme in order to make them look absurd. In my view people who call for more regulation (often with out defining what those regulations should be) fail to take into account that regulations are often passed not to benefit society at large but to favor one group over another. They also often fail to realize that regulations can have unintended consequences. One example: regulations designed to protect an endangered species by restricting land use where the species is located may do more harm to said species because the landowners – not wanting to lose use of their land – adopted a shoot, shovel, and shut up “policy” whenever they find said species living on their land. Except this is really not about increasing regulation but restoring what we had in the past. There has been a steady laissez-faire attitude since the 80's. I think the line from the movie "Wall Street" pretty much sums it up when Michael Douglas's character says "greed is good".

Marc2b -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 11:35:09 AM)
quote: Except this is really not about increasing regulation but restoring what we had in the past. Sounds like a conservative attitude. quote: There has been a steady laissez-faire attitude since the 80's. That’s debatable, but for the sake of argument let’s presume that you are right. We’ve still had the same old boom and bust cycle we’ve always had. I would regard that as evidence that regulations cannot solve our problems. You cannot legislate the perfect society. quote: I think the line from the movie "Wall Street" pretty much sums it up when Michael Douglas's character says "greed is good". But the question is: who decides where the dividing line between legitimate self interest and greed is? Also, who gets to be the one who decides where that line is?

kdsub -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 2:43:14 PM)
I think you give the party system too much importance. It is not the party or even ideas that earmark a party. It is the politicians that are making the most sense… or if not sense… then whom are the most convincing or compelling at any given election. Just look how the core values of both parties have changed over the years...often completely switching values with the opposing party. They will change again if it is politically expedient. In the past I have voted Republican and Democrat as I thought best for my family and country and I will again. I know that is the case with most Americans otherwise the power would not shift so easily. Only when the country is equally divided do the party faithful make a difference and even then not much. I’ll guarantee you if Colin Powell had been the Republican nominee and Obama had not been on the Democratic ticket the African American vote would have shifted from the Democrats to the Republicans. People will always vote what is best for them regardless of party affiliations. Otherwise parties are not so important in the Internet age…they are only the technical path to a ballot. Butch Damn... sorry not in answer to TheHeretic

slvemike4u -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 3:00:05 PM)
I don't knoow about that Butch....the party platform will still stand as that particular parties view,regardless of the personality of their standard bearer.If for instance a particular candidate has a problem with some portion of the platform ..he either has the political currency to change it or he doesn't...If he doesn't,than it might not matter to a voter whether or not he likes that candidate if the platform offends him in some way. Powell running on the Republican ticket...with the Republican anti-minority slant still might not have garnered the minority vote.BTW I think your characterization of black voters voting strictly along color lines could be construed as rasict....Black voters cast their votes in the same way the rest of the electorate does...some use informed choice...some use pure personality as their measuring stick.Did all Irish Americans vote for Kennedy or did some vote on issues?

kdsub -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 3:20:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u I don't knoow about that Butch....the party platform will still stand as that particular parties view,regardless of the personality of their standard bearer.If for instance a particular candidate has a problem with some portion of the platform ..he either has the political currency to change it or he doesn't...If he doesn't,than it might not matter to a voter whether or not he likes that candidate if the platform offends him in some way. Powell running on the Republican ticket...with the Republican anti-minority slant still might not have garnered the minority vote.BTW I think your characterization of black voters voting strictly along color lines could be construed as rasict....Black voters cast their votes in the same way the rest of the electorate does...some use informed choice...some use pure personality as their measuring stick.Did all Irish Americans vote for Kennedy or did some vote on issues? Not racists at all... they would and should vote for who would represent them the best. I believe many voters regardless of race would have also supported Colin Powell. The fact that he is black would be just icing on the cake for African Americans who need to be represented better. Party platforms change and often quickly...the same religious right that everyone says is the Republican base was once the democrat’s base. The Hispanic vote that was once Republican has shifted. All that counts is a separation at the time of an election and the parties will always find a way. But this does not mean they have the loyalty of the majority of Americans. Look at the bailout… it was party platform to support the bailout when a Republican was President now it has switched…why… because the Republicans needed something to separate them from the victorious Democrats. That is all that counts not party ideology. Butch

slvemike4u -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 3:26:52 PM)
And my point Rich was that with Powell at the head of the ticket...and yet no change in party ideology...Powell would not have suited their interest's best or any other way. The Republican party has in the past made a decision...they settled on their famous Southern Strategy after Johnson pushed thru the Civil rights act ....a decision based on political expediency perhaps...but a decision none the less....To appeal to frightened white voters...now till they repudiate that strategy what would having a black man at the head of the ticket have to do with anything...mere window dressing till and unless you change the message.

samboct -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 3:31:07 PM)
Hi Mike Butch's actually pretty bang on IIRC. Obama swept the black vote- I think it was close to 90%. However, he's wildly off when he says that people will vote for who's best for them- although it might be true that they will vote for who they think is best for them. Every Republican president since Kennedy has been a disaster- the best of the bunch was Ford and he did some pretty stupid things economically -cutting the school lunch program as an example- and Clinton wasn't much better. What aggravates me no end is that the Republican administrations have been like the boss who gives you a problem- says solve it by Friday-except do it my way, even if you've got a workable solution within the time frame. They've been idealogues who have no sense of what's actually made the country successful, and hence, they've done their best to try and destroy it, because it wasn't done- "their way". "But the question is: who decides where the dividing line between legitimate self interest and greed is? Also, who gets to be the one who decides where that line is?' This one's easy- I know way too much about greed from first hand experience. Good business involves finding win/win situations for all parties concerned- greed involves finding a path to exploit the other people at the tables weakness. Greed does not necessarily involve making more money- it's more important to have more money or really control (greed is about being a bully) than the other guy. In the long run, good business will make more money than greed; although not necessarily for any individual. Making money is not a zero sum game, except to a greedy person, since the supply of money is not fixed and can grow. Marc- your argument against regulation translates to me to be something like this- no regulations are perfect- we're always going to have boom/bust cycles- so why bother to try? Answer- idealogues are morons who forget the lessons of history. Greensplat was living in a fantasy world with his arcane pronouncements that fundamentally relied on human nature changing since the 1920s. Well, human nature didn't change, we undid the regulations that the smart people back then put in place, and gee whiz- the whole thing came unraveled again. There is no denying that business runs in boom/bust cycles- but until the idealogues got in, the cycles were smaller and more manageable. The best way to solve the problem is to make sure that people have to pass history in high school before they graduate. Sam

slvemike4u -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 3:54:36 PM)
Sam the interesting thing about your 90% number is blacks vote Democratic at a 92 % clip...so what your telling me is...having a black candidate cost the Dems 2% of the black vote....I don't think so,the black vote was and is a democratic block....The Republican party has itself to blame for that.As I said in an earlier post ,they made the expedient choice following the passage of the Civil Rights Act....that their core constituency would be those voters feeling disaffected by the Act...namely white southern voters...the party reaps the rewards of this as blacks vote a straight Democratic ticket.....Now with the changing face of the electoral map,the Republican party needs to rethink this strategy...it doesn't work anymore.

samboct -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 4:30:35 PM)
Hi Mike You're right- Obama didn't get 85% of the black vote- he got 95%. But that numbers misleading- its the size of the black vote that showed up. Where Obama really swept was in terms of the turnout of traditionally non-voting blocks- he got a lot of the younger vote too. I keep hoping that we can fix social security finally. Sam

Politesub53 -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 4:50:03 PM)
Dont all political parties unravel at some point ? I suspect the ones that are in power for a long period, forget the original ideals that got them elected. This applies worldwide.

slvemike4u -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 4:57:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Dont all political parties unravel at some point ? I suspect the ones that are in power for a long period, forget the original ideals that got them elected. This applies worldwide. I'm not sure that applies here Polite,we are for better or worse a two party system...the absence of a legitimate 3rd party insures the health of those 2 parties...even the one not in power will have a large bloc af adherents here.No, there will be no unravelling just an ebb and flow of position down thru the years.

Marc2b -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 5:22:25 PM)
quote: This one's easy- I know way too much about greed from first hand experience. Good business involves finding win/win situations for all parties concerned- greed involves finding a path to exploit the other people at the tables weakness. Greed does not necessarily involve making more money- it's more important to have more money or really control (greed is about being a bully) than the other guy. In the long run, good business will make more money than greed; although not necessarily for any individual. Making money is not a zero sum game, except to a greedy person, since the supply of money is not fixed and can grow. Marc- your argument against regulation translates to me to be something like this- no regulations are perfect- we're always going to have boom/bust cycles- so why bother to try? Answer- idealogues are morons who forget the lessons of history. Greensplat was living in a fantasy world with his arcane pronouncements that fundamentally relied on human nature changing since the 1920s. Well, human nature didn't change, we undid the regulations that the smart people back then put in place, and gee whiz- the whole thing came unraveled again. There is no denying that business runs in boom/bust cycles- but until the idealogues got in, the cycles were smaller and more manageable. The best way to solve the problem is to make sure that people have to pass history in high school before they graduate. You’re preaching to the choir. Here is the problem. Not everyone holds the same definition of greed. To some people, simply having X amount of dollars to your name is proof of greed. That’s bigotry and bigotry should never be a basis upon which to make policy (it usually is, but that doesn’t mean it should be). I am not saying that we shouldn’t bother with any regulations. What I am saying is that we must be careful in the crafting of our laws and regulations. Most people seem to have a knee jerk reaction, based upon their world view, to events. X happens therefore we should do Y. For example, someone kills a lot of people with a gun and some people respond with “we need tougher gun laws.” Then they vote for people who promise tougher gun laws. But will the new gun laws work? Are the current gun laws working? You certainly don’t have to preach to me about ideologues. For the sake of clarity, my definition of an ideology is – an enclosed system of thought that allows no disputation. The number one rule of the ideology is: the ideology is never wrong. I despise ideological “thinking.” It is one of the few things that can bring out loathing and contempt in me. Anytime you see me getting nasty on these boards it is a safe bet that I am reacting to (admittedly perceived) ideological “thinking.” One of the underlying problems in most debates is that each side presumes that it is correct and therefore the other side is either stupid or evil - or both. Nobody knows everything therefore we are all ignorant of something. This calls for humility. It is not enough to question the other guy’s presumptions. We must question our own at least as much, if not more so (the well examined ground is the firmest ground to stand upon). One of the things you need to know about me is that I like to ask the questions I think people should be asking but aren’t. I like to question the underlying presumptions. With that in mind I would ask, whose version of history shall we teach? The one that says capitalism allowed Robber Barons to enrich themselves by oppressing the working class? Or the one that says capitalism is the reason behind industrial and technical innovations that have resulted in people living longer, healthier lives? On the subject of people's presumptions that they are correct, I have just finished reading a book that I would greatly recomend to everyone: Mistakes Were Made (but not by me), why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts; by Carol Travis and Elliot Aronson.

kdsub -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 5:50:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Dont all political parties unravel at some point ? I suspect the ones that are in power for a long period, forget the original ideals that got them elected. This applies worldwide. I'm not sure that applies here Polite,we are for better or worse a two party system...the absence of a legitimate 3rd party insures the health of those 2 parties...even the one not in power will have a large bloc af adherents here.No, there will be no unravelling just an ebb and flow of position down thru the years. I think you are very wrong here... Yes the Republican / Democratic parties have been stable for a long time but it was not always so. Some day a third party candidate will smash through and could easily be the start of a new party. We are ripe for just that sort of thing…All it would take is a viable candidate with money. It almost happened with Ross Perot …he went off the deep end and lost support. Imagine if he had been a Powel ...or today a Ron Paul with money. I’m not holding my breath…lol but it is far from impossible. Butch

StrangerThan -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 6:10:13 PM)
The GOP unraveled for one reason. They followed and defended every lie Bush told. It's that simple. If the rank and file had stood up to him and said no, they wouldn't be in the position they are now. It's kind of like the quote "it's the economy, stupid." In this case, it's about Bush.

slvemike4u -> RE: Why the GOP is unraveling. (4/21/2009 6:28:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan The GOP unraveled for one reason. They followed and defended every lie Bush told. It's that simple. If the rank and file had stood up to him and said no, they wouldn't be in the position they are now. It's kind of like the quote "it's the economy, stupid." In this case, it's about Bush. Sorry ,long before it was about Bush,it was about the religious right...and before that it was the decision to fashion themselves as the party of the "real America"...the red WHITE and blue America.....the legacy of the "southern Strategy" can not be overstated.One look at the demographics of voters in this country tells us that.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875