RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity?

RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (Full Version)

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

Message

tweakabelle -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 4:44:04 AM)
Ms Palin has shown herself to be a very adept manipulator of the media. Her rise to 'stardom', the fervour of her fans, that she can maintain a position of power and influence at the fore of politics despite her obvious shortcomings, constant gaffes, general ignorance and executive ineptitude all attest to this. Her 'blood libel' comment is entirely consistent with her own slogan - "Don't Retreat, Re-Load!" - and is likely to be quite calculated and deliberate. Please don't underestimate her. She will never get into the Oval Office on her own merits, but is capable of dragging politics so far to the right that whoever does will be beholden to her and her constituency. Cheney/Rumsfeld in a frock. Who will be her Bush?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 5:31:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. And if DomKen isnt in this thread then no one knew it. Wrong, fella. I've known what it meant for decades. And I'm kinda surprised that Palin used it. There's no way she would have done so if she understood the proper use of the term. I assume that some conservative screwed up in misusing the term (note that several came out with it all on the same day), and she was too arrogant to admit she just made an honest error. wilbur just assumes that because he is crashingly ignorant that everyone else is too.

Moonhead -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 5:37:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Palin is very active, tweeting and writing stuff on her facebook regularly. I suspect that she frequently is given something to say right before she says it. Plus I get the feeling that her writers put a lot of stuff in her speeches that she doesn't understand. She's not one for serious research. You mean that you wouldn't make a point of doing that if you were writing speeches for the obnoxious sow? "Big words. What do all these big words mean? I can't read a speech with all these big words in it..."

calamitysandra -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 6:37:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. And if DomKen isnt in this thread then no one knew it. You are quite wrong.

DarkSteven -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 6:38:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Ms Palin has shown herself to be a very adept manipulator of the media. Her rise to 'stardom', the fervour of her fans, that she can maintain a position of power and influence at the fore of politics despite her obvious shortcomings, constant gaffes, general ignorance and executive ineptitude all attest to this. You forgot to mention one thing - part of her stardom is based on her ability to be consistently seen as a viable politician - something that Coulter, Beck, and Limbaugh have never claimed to be - while at the same time not wanting to ever hold elected or appointed office ever again. quote: Her 'blood libel' comment is entirely consistent with her own slogan - "Don't Retreat, Re-Load!" - and is likely to be quite calculated and deliberate. Please don't underestimate her. Are you referring to her use of the words? If so, I disagree partially. I think she used a phrase that sounded good to her without any appreciation if its connotations to Jews. The GOP has been reaching out to Jews for years, with some success. This gaffe will not help. Or are you referring to her reaction when she was made aware that she'd misused the term? quote: She will never get into the Oval Office on her own merits, but is capable of dragging politics so far to the right that whoever does will be beholden to her and her constituency. You've lost me. I think that she has no intention of getting elected. She's quite content to simply make pronouncements, make speeches, and collect money. No pesky journalists to answer to, no investigation of her background (which to be fair, even if she has nothing to hide, is intrusive, which she does not like), and expense accounts, not to mention ego gratification. I'm not sure if she actually IS dragging politics to the right. She (and the Tea Party) are energizing the righties that have previously felt marginalized in the GOP, but making the resultant candidates less electable in the general election. It remains to be seen whether the few hard right candidates elected this way have more impact than the larger number of more moderate Republicans that would have been elected if the Tea Party and Palin had not interjected themselves.

rulemylife -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 6:44:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic She did it her fucking self Rich, she couldnt just leave it to the single condolence note, she had to try and refudiate it and failed by trying to be clever When you're trying to be oh so clever you should at least use real words. You don't really keep up with things, do you Willbeur? Sarah Palin Refudiate Saga Continues

EternalHoH -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 6:51:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. That pretty much sums up her potential run in 2012, doesnt it? Hoping that her potential voters aren't all that bright and never catch on - until some scholarly nitwit points something out.

SlaveOwnerDave -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 6:59:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. That pretty much sums up her potential run in 2012, doesn't it? Hoping that her potential voters aren't all that bright and never catch on - until some scholarly nitwit points something out. Damn those educated nitwits, and their vocabularies! I'm melting! I'm melting! I'm melting! ^ See the damage they can cause?

tweakabelle -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 7:02:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven You've lost me. I think that she has no intention of getting elected. She's quite content to simply make pronouncements, make speeches, and collect money. No pesky journalists to answer to, no investigation of her background (which to be fair, even if she has nothing to hide, is intrusive, which she does not like), and expense accounts, not to mention ego gratification. I'm not sure if she actually IS dragging politics to the right. She (and the Tea Party) are energizing the righties that have previously felt marginalized in the GOP, but making the resultant candidates less electable in the general election. It remains to be seen whether the few hard right candidates elected this way have more impact than the larger number of more moderate Republicans. I hope you are right and I am wrong! My fears are based on our experience here of a Palin-like phenomenon around the turn of the century. If you like, Wiki 'Pauline Hanson' to find out more about that. Hanson failed utterly to attain power - but her phenomenon had the effect of dragging all of Australian politics to the right for a generation as the major parties repositioned themselves to regain support lost to her movement, which sounded and looked pretty much like your Tea Party. I do hope my fears are misplaced but yanno what they say about history repeating itself ........ BTW if it's any consolation Hanson ended up doing prison time for electoral fraud [:D]

DomKen -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 7:25:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. And if DomKen isnt in this thread then no one knew it. I'm willing to bet most of the jews on this thread know what it means.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 7:46:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant But as I have noted before...acceptance by a person from one political leaning (especially someone like HillWilliam)of someone from the other side tends to indicate that the person being accepted has embraced views which may be palatable to the "opposition" but...usually...are no longer in sync with their own party. ...but is it not possible to seperate the views from the tone? In other words, can't someone hold Republican views that you'd accept and yet still reject the tonality of confrontation? i guess, what i'm asking is, in your view have confrontation and disrepspect for ones political opponent become not just the norm is US political discourse, but essential to it? eta.....should be noted that there are examples from both sides of the aisle of the type of confrontational discourse i've decried above. It absolutely is not the preserve of any one political party. I think it is INDEED possible to separate the views from the tone. There are many posters on these threads who discuss passionately without devolving to crude insults and emotion-laden statements...and yes, I include myself most times in that statement. However...as I have noted, it is not just Scarborough's calls for a toning-down of the confrontational nature that bothers those on the right. It has been his adaptation of views that do not fit in with many conservative viewpoints. If the change has been such that he is not just approved of by centrist (moderate) Republicans and Democrats but by more leftist members of the Democrat party, then would you not have to admit that such an about-face would be troublesome if it were occurring with say...Obama? While those of us on the right would LOVE his moving to our viewpoint, can you understand that to his base...he would be seen as (and I hate to use this word because I know the images it conjures up) traitorous? My use of the Raum Emmanuel example was to illustrate to those who seem to feel that the inflammation only comes from the right that there are plenty of examples from the left. But when we now find ourselves in a time in which a tragedy has occurred, all you hear from the pundits on the left is that...somehow...the tragedy is the right's fault. Palin put crosshairs on different places on the map to show districts being targeted? Cries of "warfare" and "violent images". Obama, in speaking of dealing with the Republicans, states that they are the enemy and need to face payback...speaks of bringing a gun to a knife-fight. When this is pointed out as being similar in violent images, the pundits state that it is just a "display of passion and temerity and resolve". I...and others...call bullshit.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 7:52:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/11779_joescarboroughwantstherepublicanpartyback I'd support him. Scarborough has been inching towards the left for a long time now. The fact that a progressive such as yourself...for your posts certainly do not reveal you as a moderate Democrat... would "support" him shows just which side he is closest to. ...ok CD.......what is there in the quoted article that this guy has said that you find left wing? Or is he seen as inching towards communism purely because he apparently eschews the confrontational tone? I did not say that there was anything in the article. What I noted was that he has been moving that way for awhile. That includes time before the article. As for not wanting confrontational measures...he is living in a dreamland. The confrontations occur on both sides...rhetoric from the right...and rhetoric from the left. Look at Raum Emmanuel and his sending of a dead fish to a pollster that he took a dislike to. I would say that is pretty confrontational and that comes from the left. It is the nature of the political beast in this country. People from the left are going to come across in an "attack" mode and people from the right are going to do the same. But as I have noted before...acceptance by a person from one political leaning (especially someone like HillWilliam)of someone from the other side tends to indicate that the person being accepted has embraced views which may be palatable to the "opposition" but...usually...are no longer in sync with their own party. Um CD, just because sanity and wilbur call Me a 'lefty' doesnt mean that 75 to 90% of My votes dont go to the Republican party. Just sayin No...it doesn't. Your posts would indicate something far different from a conservative viewpoint and little support for those on the right. I don't believe I've seen you post anything positive about any Republican or conservative position. Can you perhaps point me to such posts that you have made in any thread since shortly before the election?

SlaveOwnerDave -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 8:28:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant My use of the Raum Emmanuel example was to illustrate to those who seem to feel that the inflammation only comes from the right that there are plenty of examples from the left. But when we now find ourselves in a time in which a tragedy has occurred, all you hear from the pundits on the left is that...somehow...the tragedy is the right's fault. Palin put cross-hairs on different places on the map to show districts being targeted? Cries of "warfare" and "violent images". Obama, in speaking of dealing with the Republicans, states that they are the enemy and need to face payback...speaks of bringing a gun to a knife-fight. When this is pointed out as being similar in violent images, the pundits state that it is just a "display of passion and temerity and resolve". I...and others...call bullshit. We are to believe, then, the daily multi-hour multi-channel barrage of hate radio comes from "the left"? That this barrage has absolutely zero power on those who listen to it? If hate radio has no effect, then why is it well funded? In any case, most conservative people have left the Republican Party, as the far right took over. The far right are not conservative. They are activist, reactionary, and hateful. These are not traits of conservative people! These are not traits of Americans!

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 8:37:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. That pretty much sums up her potential run in 2012, doesnt it? Hoping that her potential voters aren't all that bright and never catch on - until some scholarly nitwit points something out. She doesnt have nor has ever had potential to run for POTUS.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 8:39:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. And if DomKen isnt in this thread then no one knew it. I'm willing to bet most of the jews on this thread know what it means. I highly doubt it, despite the protests to the contrary. I'll add in DarkSteven and one wild card.

philosophy -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 8:58:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant However...as I have noted, it is not just Scarborough's calls for a toning-down of the confrontational nature that bothers those on the right. It has been his adaptation of views that do not fit in with many conservative viewpoints. If the change has been such that he is not just approved of by centrist (moderate) Republicans and Democrats but by more leftist members of the Democrat party, then would you not have to admit that such an about-face would be troublesome if it were occurring with say...Obama? While those of us on the right would LOVE his moving to our viewpoint, can you understand that to his base...he would be seen as (and I hate to use this word because I know the images it conjures up) traitorous? ....thanks for your answer CD. i appreciate your reticence in using the traitor word. However, one more question and i'll leave you alone. This Scarborough chap is new to me, so please forgive my ignorance, but has he moved to the left or has his party moved to the right? What policy has he espoused that could be considered socialist or communistic?

AnimusRex -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 9:17:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SlaveOwnerDave In any case, most conservative people have left the Republican Party, as the far right took over. The far right are not conservative. They are activist, reactionary, and hateful. These are not traits of conservative people! These are not traits of Americans![/size][/font] Quoted for truth. Conservatism, as defined by people like Buckley and Kirk, was a viewpoint of caution and skepticism, demanding empirical evidence and logic. The Tea Party is a band of political fundamentalists.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 9:34:25 AM)
Well, CD, I indicated I would support a Republican who, by the way, was one of those who led the "Impeach Clinton" charge by starting this thread. Does that count?

stef -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 10:07:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: calamitysandra quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is probably one person in this thread who knew the historical meaning of "blood libel" before some HuffPo nitwit made a stink about it. And if DomKen isnt in this thread then no one knew it. You are quite wrong. That's his default state. ~stef

Hillwilliam -> RE: Maybe the Republican party needs a voice of sanity? (1/13/2011 11:10:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Well, CD, I indicated I would support a Republican who, by the way, was one of those who led the "Impeach Clinton" charge by starting this thread. Does that count? Edited to add. I'll let a few of you folks that dont seem to realize it that there is a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIG assed area between the far right and the far left called the middle. There's folks on both sides of this board that cant seem to wrap their minds around it.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0619812