The Conservative Dilemma (Full Version)

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



Message


cloudboy -> The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 7:29:59 PM)

The Government Shutdown and Debt Ceiling threat forced Congressional Republicans to choose between:

(1) Greed -- Not wanting to lose money.

and

(2) Their Anger -- Hatred of Democrats, Government, Immigrants, etc.

No wonder the party is at war with itself, torn apart, and the rest....

From the anger wing:

I was thinking about this last night, too, while I was pondering if I can ever remember a greater political disaster in my lifetime,” Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday on his radio show, “if I could ever remember a time when a political party just made a decision not to exist for all intents and purposes.”

This view of the shutdown, while infuriating to many on the right, has the virtue of being something fixable. On the conservative blog RedState, Erick Erickson said the capitulation was an urgent lesson in the need to replace establishment Republicans with true conservatives. Tea Party members here in Tennessee agreed, saying that despite the lack of policy victories by the Republicans in Congress, the shutdown had energized the base and shown them that some conservatives, like Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, were willing to stand up.


From the I want to make money side:

Sam Eppley, a Republican, said he supports Mr. Lamborn. But he was worried about the shutdown’s toll, fearful of the effect it could have on the cooking store he owns in Colorado Springs, and he disagreed with Mr. Lamborn’s vote against the deal to reopen the government.

“Whether you’re for or you’re against Obamacare or some variation of it, it should not have been tied to a government shutdown,” he said, adding, “I don’t think the nation should have been held hostage over one issue like that.”




DesideriScuri -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 7:45:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
The Government Shutdown and Debt Ceiling threat forced Congressional Republicans to choose between:
(1) Greed -- Not wanting to lose money.


This had little to do with anything. Greed makes the world go 'round. Both parties are full of people wanting more money and more power. That's all it really boils down to.

quote:

(2) Their Anger -- Hatred of Democrats, Government, Immigrants, etc.


Perhaps one day you'll have a clue as to what Republicans stand for. They are only against Democrats if it means they can gain power from it (there is little difference between the "establishment" members of either party). They don't hate government. If they hated government, why would they be part of it? And, why would they continue to allow it to grow in size, scope and power? Your pitting of Republicans against immigrants is ridiculous. Can you show me a handful of Congressional Republicans that are against immigration? You and I both know that the GOP isn't against immigration, but against illegal immigration. You are just unwilling to actually admit it.






cloudboy -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 8:43:31 PM)

quote:

GOP isn't against immigration


Immigration Reform and / or the Dream Act would be law if not for the Republicans.

Republicans don't want to solve problems and are also operating with an empty bag of tricks except for opposition to everything: Immigration Law and the ACA among other things.

They are angry at the deficit but don't want to raise taxes or cut military spending.

They are angry about immigration, but don't want to solve / address the problem.

They are angry at the ACA but have no solutions of their own to cut health care costs or expand coverage.

They love money (Big Business and Wall Street) just as two examples, but this misalligns with the angry Tea Party.

Without any ideas, proposals, or rational agenda -- the Republicans have simply morphed into anti-establishment group, some of whom would have defaulted on the US debt.

Republicans did not learn anything from the Vietnam War. Did not learn anything from the debacle of arming the Taliban to oust the Communists from Afghanistan.

They have not learned much from the errors of the Bush Administration.

The truth is, anger has gunked up the Republican party from evolving in any meaningful sense.

The wealthy, xenophobes, homophobes, fundamentalist Christians, and military hawks are about the only winners under their rule. Libertarians might like some of the economic policies, but lose under their social policies.




TheHeretic -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 8:47:09 PM)

FR

Perhaps, if conversations didn't begin with the other guy being told what he thinks, they might be more productive, and less about driving needles into the tits of the foolish?

Just a possible solution to toss out on the table and tinker with...





NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 8:56:35 PM)

BEN STEIN FOR PRESIDENT!

Who apparently doesn't believe in 2/3rds of what's posted above.




DomKen -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 9:31:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

BEN STEIN FOR PRESIDENT!

Who apparently doesn't believe in 2/3rds of what's posted above.

Ben Stein believes whatever the guy paying him at the moment believes.




NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 9:36:57 PM)

Incorrect. He's been banned from both Fox TV shows AND The Daily Show for what he believes (see, you were acting on unfounded belief aka FAITH again, Dom!).

And he was paid by Comedy Central, which now doesn't like what he has to say.

So, NO.




DesideriScuri -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 9:44:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
quote:

GOP isn't against immigration

Immigration Reform and / or the Dream Act would be law if not for the Republicans.


The GOP opposed amnesty, which is why they opposed the Dream Act. Who thinks legal immigration is a bad thing? No one in Congress. You are equating being against illegal immigration to being against immigration of all types. And, that is wrong.

quote:

Republicans don't want to solve problems and are also operating with an empty bag of tricks except for opposition to everything: Immigration Law and the ACA among other things.


Wrong again.

quote:

They are angry at the deficit but don't want to raise taxes or cut military spending.


Why would they want to raise taxes when the belief is that it's a spending problem (might have something to do with the near record revenues we're bringing in, but that's just more OMB right-wing skew, right?).

Yes, Defense spending is quite troubling. This Conservative is opposed to the amount we're spending on defense. It's their sacred cow.

quote:

They are angry about immigration, but don't want to solve / address the problem.


They don't? That's pretty interesting. I think there was this one Republican that pushed for some sort of barrier along our southern border, but his name escapes me. Seems to me there was even legislation passed that funded that barrier. That just might be a first step towards immigration reform, no?

quote:

They are angry at the ACA but have no solutions of their own to cut health care costs or expand coverage.


Bullshit. Read the other threads. They have ideas. None will get through the Senate, but that doesn't mean they don't have ideas.

quote:

They love money (Big Business and Wall Street) just as two examples, but this misalligns with the angry Tea Party.


This is absolutely true. You might want to point out the Democrats are also sitting in the lap of Big Biz, because they are. Oddly enough, this is one of the reasons I support a much smaller Federal Government. That reduces the reach it has, and, therefore, reduces the opportunity for Corporatism that we have today.

quote:

Without any ideas, proposals, or rational agenda -- the Republicans have simply morphed into anti-establishment group, some of whom would have defaulted on the US debt.


There was no actual danger of default unless the Administration decided to do so. We could easily have serviced our debts with what we have coming in.

quote:

Republicans did not learn anything from the Vietnam War. Did not learn anything from the debacle of arming the Taliban to oust the Communists from Afghanistan.


What lessons should they have learned from the Vietnam War?

We haven't learned from arming the rebels (essentially creating al Qaeda, the mujahadeen and the Taliban). We also haven't learned from the debacle that was Saddam Hussein. Might want to mention the Iran shitmess we helped cause.

Who armed the rebels in Syria? Or, should I say, who has been and probably still is, arming the rebels in Syria? Who helped arm the rebels in Libya? Sure looks as if the current President hasn't learned from the past fuckups we've caused, either.

quote:

They have not learned much from the errors of the Bush Administration.


What lessons would those have been? Don't look now, either, but the Democrats haven't really changed much from the Bush years, have they?

quote:

The truth is, anger has gunked up the Republican party from evolving in any meaningful sense.


Conservatism hasn't changed. Unfortunately, the GOP has changed, and not towards Conservatism.

You seem to have forgotten the 8 years of railing at Bush the Democrats did in the 00's.




DomKen -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/18/2013 11:13:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

Incorrect. He's been banned from both Fox TV shows AND The Daily Show for what he believes (see, you were acting on unfounded belief aka FAITH again, Dom!).

And he was paid by Comedy Central, which now doesn't like what he has to say.

So, NO.

Actually yes. Just look into his most recent project, Expelled.





lovmuffin -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/19/2013 12:21:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

Incorrect. He's been banned from both Fox TV shows AND The Daily Show for what he believes (see, you were acting on unfounded belief aka FAITH again, Dom!).

And he was paid by Comedy Central, which now doesn't like what he has to say.

So, NO.

Actually yes. Just look into his most recent project, Expelled.




I know who Ben Stein is but I don't have a clue what you're talking about. What's up with that ?




thishereboi -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/19/2013 5:42:14 AM)

I hate to burst your bubble but both sides were greedy and hated the other long before the shutdown. This is nothing new from either side.




DomKen -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/19/2013 7:11:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

Incorrect. He's been banned from both Fox TV shows AND The Daily Show for what he believes (see, you were acting on unfounded belief aka FAITH again, Dom!).

And he was paid by Comedy Central, which now doesn't like what he has to say.

So, NO.

Actually yes. Just look into his most recent project, Expelled.




I know who Ben Stein is but I don't have a clue what you're talking about. What's up with that ?

That's because Stein got into the business of being the guy in a really awful moving claiming the theory of evolution was equivalent to the Holocaust and his career basically ended.




cloudboy -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/20/2013 2:20:30 PM)

As was expected, no Conservative respondents put forth a single "positive" proposal from the Republicans to improve or address a problem facing the USA -- especially concerning health care, deficit reduction, or immigration reform.

-----

D.S. Points out that Republicans are "for immigration" but oppose "illegal immigration." It is a distinction without difference in the real world but one highly relevant in to him.

If pot-smoking is outlawed, one is against Marijuana. You can't claim to be for "legal" pot smoking but against "illegal pot smoking."

Congress has plenary authority to regulate immigration laws, and rewriting the laws to open up immigration to candidates living in the USA is "pro-immigration." To be against such reforms is "anti-immigration."

The Republicans are saying "fuck you" and "I don't give a shit" to all legally shut-out, potential immigrants living in the USA right now. They can't fund or implement mass-deportations, so the solution is a policy of "do-nothing" and OPPOSE REFORM and the implementation of new laws.

Raising the speed limit on highways is not "an amnesty for speeders," it a law allowing drivers to go faster.

-----

The Heretic, as usual, has zero (0).

----

The truth is, The Republicans right now have ONE PRESSING CONCERN, and that is WHAT DO WITH THE TEA PARTY. This comes #1 before WHAT TO ABOUT HELPING PASS LAWS that will solve problems in the USA.




Yachtie -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/20/2013 3:21:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

D.S. Points out that Republicans are "for immigration" but oppose "illegal immigration." It is a distinction without difference in the real world but one highly relevant in to him.

If pot-smoking is outlawed, one is against Marijuana. You can't claim to be for "legal" pot smoking but against "illegal pot smoking."



You're kidding, right?

It's not the act of smoking pot that is necessarily either legal or illegal. It could simply be the source of the pot. Like alcohol having a tax stamp. It's not the act of immigration, but the method.

One might easily say they are for legal pot smoking but against illegal pot smoking. That would be but a mere distinction as to upholding the law.

If pot-smoking is outlawed, one is against Marijuana.


How do you come to that conclusion?




Hillwilliam -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/20/2013 3:31:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

. On the conservative blog RedState, Erick Erickson said the capitulation was an urgent lesson in the need to replace establishment Republicans with true conservatives.


I see this as the key.

First, Republicans can't even agree on what a "True conservative" is.

Secondly, "True conservatives" started disappearing from the ranks of the party 35 years ago and are incredibly rare today.




DesideriScuri -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/20/2013 6:10:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
D.S. Points out that Republicans are "for immigration" but oppose "illegal immigration." It is a distinction without difference in the real world but one highly relevant in to him.
If pot-smoking is outlawed, one is against Marijuana. You can't claim to be for "legal" pot smoking but against "illegal pot smoking."
Congress has plenary authority to regulate immigration laws, and rewriting the laws to open up immigration to candidates living in the USA is "pro-immigration." To be against such reforms is "anti-immigration."
The Republicans are saying "fuck you" and "I don't give a shit" to all legally shut-out, potential immigrants living in the USA right now. They can't fund or implement mass-deportations, so the solution is a policy of "do-nothing" and OPPOSE REFORM and the implementation of new laws.
Raising the speed limit on highways is not "an amnesty for speeders," it a law allowing drivers to go faster.


More bullshit from up in the clouds.

Why did the DREAM Act not pass? It included amnesty.

Does that mean that other immigration reforms are also opposed? Nope. It means that not allowing amnesty is very important.

Look at this past shutdown crap. The Republicans passed legislation that funded all government, except Obamacare. The Democrats would only pass legislation that funded all government, including Obamacare; that is, they wouldn't pass the funding legislation unless it included funding Obamacare. Does that mean they were opposed to everything else? Absolutely not.

quote:

The truth is, The Republicans right now have ONE PRESSING CONCERN, and that is WHAT DO WITH THE TEA PARTY. This comes #1 before WHAT TO ABOUT HELPING PASS LAWS that will solve problems in the USA.


You are making an assumption that the GOP should care about what you think the GOP should care about. Do you align yourself with the GOP? If the Tea Party broke off from the GOP and formed their own party, would you align yourself with the GOP? If you can't honestly answer yes to either of those questions, your ideas about what the GOP should or shouldn't do is worthless.

The measure of a Congress isn't how many laws it can pass or how many it does pass. Quantity is meaningless, really. It's the content of the laws that passed, or the content of the laws that weren't passed that matters.

You are pro immigration. Not surprising to anyone that knows me or reads my beliefs on the subject, so am I. I am opposed to illegal immigration, and rewarding those who have broken our immigration laws. If amnesty is granted to all illegal immigrants, you are shitting on every person taking the pain in the ass legal route towards immigration. Not everyone is into scat, so, you could be forcing many to safecall.

Should immigration be easier? Fuck yes, it should! Should there be a limit on the number of immigrants allowed? I will defer to people more in the know, but I can't think of a good reason why there should be a limit. I can see it being in the best interest of the country to bar criminals from other countries, but not as an across the board "red line."

Amnesty, though? Not at all.




papassion -> RE: The Conservative Dilemma (10/21/2013 10:19:39 AM)

We already have high unemployment, especially among the unskilled, (what most of the Illegals are) How HUMANE is a law that would encourage them to come and stay to the US to be doomed to a life of hard work and low pay? The factory jobs that paid well and required little education are GONE. Get over it. Every day, automation eliminates more unskilled jobs. Without a good backround in electronics, hydrolics and industrial mechanics, you will remain at the bottom of the pay sale




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.152344E-02