Forums » Off-Topic
Prof, in regards to your response to visitor, you, among others, have bashed the Republican party endlessly for "capitulating to liberal values" and spending too much. If that's not a "backstab" of the "party", then I don't know what is.
Just thought I'd point it out.
*favors a third party that doesn't suck. America needs change.. how about real change this time*
Just thought I'd point it out.
*favors a third party that doesn't suck. America needs change.. how about real change this time*
[Obligatory]
Some Guy: Is there a Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: Ehem, is there a Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: ... Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: Forget it.
_________________________________
Now how to get a Robert Paulson chant in there?
Some Guy: Is there a Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: Ehem, is there a Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: ... Ro--
Random Guy: RON PAUL
Some Guy: Forget it.
_________________________________
Now how to get a Robert Paulson chant in there?
"his name is Robert Pau---"
Bitch Tits!
Bitch Tits!
Bob. Bob had bitch tits.
the reason Palin was scary to the left is that she was the embodiment of the ideal conservative
No, Palin was scary to the Left, and to those of us with more than two neurons to rub together, because she's a fucking moron. "I can see Russia from my house!" You must be fucking kidding me. "Drill baby, drill!" Yes, we should. But we'll leave that sort of populist babble to the democrats' welfare voter brigades, thank you very much. And so on. Soccer moms who look into restricting what books the public library system can carry are not viable national candidates. Period. And you can be as religious as you like, but if you want to get elected in this country, let your supporters talk up your faith while you yourself do not talk about how much God helps you do your job. Those of us who like rational leaders are not huge fans of that crap.
The Left and some of the middle also found her unpalatable for other reasons that aren't all that offensive to the rest of us: the hunting, the guns, the redneck factor, etc. She embraces the worst sterotypes of the luddite, knuckle-dragging Republican as part of her down home charm. Don't get me wrong: I love guns and, more importantly, I'll defend to the death the right of law-abiding citizens to own and carry them without navigating a series of laws that are designed to be more prohibitive of the right they supposedly just "reasonably restrict" than any early 1900's Southern voting codes for blacks were. And I love hunting and killing things that I can later throw on a grill. But if you're running for national office, you'd better understand your whole audience--Palin didn't just not get it, she got it and then inexplicably ran in the other direction.
None of which is to say that she wasn't unfairly crucified by the media, who were really excited to have some dirt-digging to do after gagging themselves on Obama's knob for so many months. She was. But that's not really the point, execpt to note that she's a particularly easy target. Like her or not, she's an inexcusable liability.
No, Palin was scary to the Left, and to those of us with more than two neurons to rub together, because she's a fucking moron. "I can see Russia from my house!" You must be fucking kidding me. "Drill baby, drill!" Yes, we should. But we'll leave that sort of populist babble to the democrats' welfare voter brigades, thank you very much. And so on. Soccer moms who look into restricting what books the public library system can carry are not viable national candidates. Period. And you can be as religious as you like, but if you want to get elected in this country, let your supporters talk up your faith while you yourself do not talk about how much God helps you do your job. Those of us who like rational leaders are not huge fans of that crap.
The Left and some of the middle also found her unpalatable for other reasons that aren't all that offensive to the rest of us: the hunting, the guns, the redneck factor, etc. She embraces the worst sterotypes of the luddite, knuckle-dragging Republican as part of her down home charm. Don't get me wrong: I love guns and, more importantly, I'll defend to the death the right of law-abiding citizens to own and carry them without navigating a series of laws that are designed to be more prohibitive of the right they supposedly just "reasonably restrict" than any early 1900's Southern voting codes for blacks were. And I love hunting and killing things that I can later throw on a grill. But if you're running for national office, you'd better understand your whole audience--Palin didn't just not get it, she got it and then inexplicably ran in the other direction.
None of which is to say that she wasn't unfairly crucified by the media, who were really excited to have some dirt-digging to do after gagging themselves on Obama's knob for so many months. She was. But that's not really the point, execpt to note that she's a particularly easy target. Like her or not, she's an inexcusable liability.
Dr. Lecter, you are smarter than this. You should be, at least. This is why I am embarrassed of the Republican party, because so many who should know better are afraid to support a real conservative because they are afraid of what others would think of it. You have jumped on the bandwagon of trashing Sarah Palin. My only comfort here is to know that you are in the minority of conservatives (not that a majority means an opinion is right). Sarah Palin never said "I can see Russia from my house!" and you know it. She did not ban books at the Wasilla public library, though the Obama administration did attempt to restrict media critical of Obama, using McCain-Feingold (a.k.a. the Silence Republicans Bill) as justification. Furthermore I would be much more comfortable with a president whose morals were guided by a firmly held belief in God (in any god) than one who believes that religious beliefs are dangerous. There is no evidence whatsoever that Palin has ever let her specific religious beliefs dictate her policy. It is more a matter of moral character that concerns me, and makes me feel better with a religious person in power (provided the religion is kept personal). Holding religious beliefs is not a sign that a person is not rational; quite the opposite. Palin is no moron, and you know it. It's not so bad hearing comments like yours from idiot liberals, that's to be expected. It really infuriates me to hear these comments from my own party. Let me ask you this: Is Obama a better President than you think Palin would be?
And moldy: Are you serious?!? Please explain to me how my lamenting the fact that my party is abandoning its core principles is backstabbing, because I don't understand your logic. What if you joined a group because its stated beliefs very closely echoed your own, but then shortly after joining this group its leaders decided that the group would fit better in the mainstream if they modified these beliefs significantly. If you spoke out, would you be stabbing your group in the back? Or is it the leaders of the group betraying the bulk of the group, the ones without as much of a voice, that is stabbing the group in the back? McCain, Powell, etc. are the real back-stabbers. McCain's staff is largely responsible for the smearing of Sarah Palin, and it is evil and inexcusable.
*favors returning the Republican party to its forgotten conservative roots and re-naming it the Limbaugh party.*
And moldy: Are you serious?!? Please explain to me how my lamenting the fact that my party is abandoning its core principles is backstabbing, because I don't understand your logic. What if you joined a group because its stated beliefs very closely echoed your own, but then shortly after joining this group its leaders decided that the group would fit better in the mainstream if they modified these beliefs significantly. If you spoke out, would you be stabbing your group in the back? Or is it the leaders of the group betraying the bulk of the group, the ones without as much of a voice, that is stabbing the group in the back? McCain, Powell, etc. are the real back-stabbers. McCain's staff is largely responsible for the smearing of Sarah Palin, and it is evil and inexcusable.
*favors returning the Republican party to its forgotten conservative roots and re-naming it the Limbaugh party.*
Sigh. You're right, PC, I am smarter. You, apparently, are not. If Palin appears anywhere NEAR the Republican ticket in 2012, I promise you a total of 8 years of Democratic damage under Obama. I'll put $100 where my mouth is, if you'd like to wager: we can both paypal it to Inc. and have him hold in escrow.
You seem to think that criticising Obama--who is everything you claim and worse--helps Palin in some way. It does not: just because he's terrible doesn't mean I should vote for her.
Although, yes, I would probably seat Palin over Obama--but that's simply because the damage her sort of idiot does is easier to undo than the sort he is doing/will do is. Obama stands for (1) requiring the country to pay for "basic" services for all, in exchange for which the State will start to have more of a role in everyone's life, and (2) enormous taxes on those of us who actually work for a living but who use almost no public services, since our national debt has become so large as to scare the shit out of China. Forget soaking the "rich" (a concept that's oddly defined, since $250k a year in Manhattan and $250k a year in, say, Dallas are two very different standards of living). The middle class, as defined by Obama just a few months ago, will be paying through the nose by 2012.
The hardest thing to fix in a democracy are major entitlements. They're like plaque in the arteries of a nation, but getting rid of them becomes impossible. Palin, at least, is merely dumb but not inclined towards communalism.
You seem to think that criticising Obama--who is everything you claim and worse--helps Palin in some way. It does not: just because he's terrible doesn't mean I should vote for her.
Although, yes, I would probably seat Palin over Obama--but that's simply because the damage her sort of idiot does is easier to undo than the sort he is doing/will do is. Obama stands for (1) requiring the country to pay for "basic" services for all, in exchange for which the State will start to have more of a role in everyone's life, and (2) enormous taxes on those of us who actually work for a living but who use almost no public services, since our national debt has become so large as to scare the shit out of China. Forget soaking the "rich" (a concept that's oddly defined, since $250k a year in Manhattan and $250k a year in, say, Dallas are two very different standards of living). The middle class, as defined by Obama just a few months ago, will be paying through the nose by 2012.
The hardest thing to fix in a democracy are major entitlements. They're like plaque in the arteries of a nation, but getting rid of them becomes impossible. Palin, at least, is merely dumb but not inclined towards communalism.
Ah, I forgot. I should never argue with a die hard conservative (or liberal).
I'm still waiting for that "Stop spending money like a drunk baby + don't screw with my rights" party. Maybe it'll materialize in a dream sometime.
I'm still waiting for that "Stop spending money like a drunk baby + don't screw with my rights" party. Maybe it'll materialize in a dream sometime.
This man is more conservative than Palin, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh combined and he's considered an outcast among mainstream republicans. And here's your figurehead for the "Stop spending money like a drunk baby + don't screw with my rights" party, Moldy.
I'm still waiting for that "Stop spending money like a drunk baby + don't screw with my rights" party.
Many of us are. But it can't come from the Left, which is philosophically committed to Helping Everyone Be OK Through Government Assistance.
The sooner the Republicans start to convert to that approach--rather than focusing on abortion and gays, the two weakest points for the Right--the sooner they'll be relevant again. Hint to PC: Palin isn't helping any with that conversion.
Though, Moldy, given your strong anti-Second Amendment views, your definition of "screwing with other people's rights" might not really be what a lot of us are looking for.
Many of us are. But it can't come from the Left, which is philosophically committed to Helping Everyone Be OK Through Government Assistance.
The sooner the Republicans start to convert to that approach--rather than focusing on abortion and gays, the two weakest points for the Right--the sooner they'll be relevant again. Hint to PC: Palin isn't helping any with that conversion.
Though, Moldy, given your strong anti-Second Amendment views, your definition of "screwing with other people's rights" might not really be what a lot of us are looking for.
See now.. This is why I am a Libertarian...
You wanna snort coke? Fine by me, just don't get on public roads and drive..
You wanna snort coke? Fine by me, just don't get on public roads and drive..
Indeed. Also, don't expect me to pay for your health care.
<sigh> I love Ron Paul. I just wish he didn't fall into the "crazy wacko" traps that the opposing politicians set for him. It's like he doesn't see them coming. Can't we get handlers to wave him off or something?
I wonder if Peter Schiff will be able to stop self-promoting himself enough to realize he might be able to make a difference come 2016...
How come all the libertarian-style folks all have these huge liabilities? Perot, Paul, Schiff, etc.
And... is it too much to ask that we get congressional representatives that don't want to spend ALL our money?
I want Reagan back. He scared the hell out of our enemies (Cold War), knew how to deal with unions (ATC strike), and brought us out of a recession with "voodoo" economics that (surprise, surprise) actually WORKED. Low taxes and higher supplies of goods CREATES demand. It also lowered inflation. Sure it increased the national debt, but look at what's happening now!
We're sending the debt to unheard-of-levels not to create wealth, but to create dependency on the government. This is a scary, scary time.
I wonder if Peter Schiff will be able to stop self-promoting himself enough to realize he might be able to make a difference come 2016...
How come all the libertarian-style folks all have these huge liabilities? Perot, Paul, Schiff, etc.
And... is it too much to ask that we get congressional representatives that don't want to spend ALL our money?
I want Reagan back. He scared the hell out of our enemies (Cold War), knew how to deal with unions (ATC strike), and brought us out of a recession with "voodoo" economics that (surprise, surprise) actually WORKED. Low taxes and higher supplies of goods CREATES demand. It also lowered inflation. Sure it increased the national debt, but look at what's happening now!
We're sending the debt to unheard-of-levels not to create wealth, but to create dependency on the government. This is a scary, scary time.
this thread is so full of moronic half truth comments that i can barely read it
I'm still waiting for that "Stop spending money like a drunk baby + don't screw with my rights" party.
http://www.lp.org That was easy.
http://www.lp.org That was easy.
I don't imagine that's the only reason you can barely read it, peypey.
I'm sure the whole English thing is also a difficulty for you.
I'm sure the whole English thing is also a difficulty for you.
This thread is so full of moronic half truth comments that i can barely read it
You were expecting something else from a right wing circle jerk in the off topic section of a space MMO?
You were expecting something else from a right wing circle jerk in the off topic section of a space MMO?
yea peter shiffs self promoting is almost as bad as rush's. but shiff makes better points, sadly none of them seem to be willing to say the really hard truths, even Ron Paul.
The hard truth of it is, the problem of having spent too much and borrowed too much has gotten so bad that it's already too late. It's now become terminal to our economy and the US dollar.
Sure we can slow it down a little, but barring some miracle, or a fantastic string of concurrent fuckups everywhere else in the world, the game is ending, we missed the last train, before bush was even in office. (and no im not blaming Clinton either)
Debt is political heroin, it may feel good at first and stop the pain for a little while, but once you're hooked, it's over. This country has reverse mortgaged itself and well the money is almost all gone and now we're trying to make it out of thin air.
Hard times are coming, Really Really hard times that would have made my grandparents cry. I feel really bad for the young children today, most of their life will be spent either just trying to survive, or at best trying to rebuild this country. And I don't hold out much hope for that "American can-do spirit". Especially after seeing how badly the human animal effect took place during the LA riots, and later Katrina.
As for when the whole thing really shits the bed, your guess is as good as mine, few days ago nobody showed up at a treasury sale, 8 billion in treasury were sold to a group that resold them back to the fed, in essence allowing them to monetize debt. Will china say 'no mas' next week or next year, couldn't tell ya. Exports to the US are only i think 7% of their economy, and their savings rate is much more than that, so it'd only mean they get richer more slowly. They could keep helping us out for a couple years or tomorrow they could stop throwing good money after bad.
Taking that as my long term view, it's kinda hard for me to get too riled up over the "obama damage" unless it looks like its going to seriously hurt me before shit falls apart. Afterward I'm the invisible man.
The hard truth of it is, the problem of having spent too much and borrowed too much has gotten so bad that it's already too late. It's now become terminal to our economy and the US dollar.
Sure we can slow it down a little, but barring some miracle, or a fantastic string of concurrent fuckups everywhere else in the world, the game is ending, we missed the last train, before bush was even in office. (and no im not blaming Clinton either)
Debt is political heroin, it may feel good at first and stop the pain for a little while, but once you're hooked, it's over. This country has reverse mortgaged itself and well the money is almost all gone and now we're trying to make it out of thin air.
Hard times are coming, Really Really hard times that would have made my grandparents cry. I feel really bad for the young children today, most of their life will be spent either just trying to survive, or at best trying to rebuild this country. And I don't hold out much hope for that "American can-do spirit". Especially after seeing how badly the human animal effect took place during the LA riots, and later Katrina.
As for when the whole thing really shits the bed, your guess is as good as mine, few days ago nobody showed up at a treasury sale, 8 billion in treasury were sold to a group that resold them back to the fed, in essence allowing them to monetize debt. Will china say 'no mas' next week or next year, couldn't tell ya. Exports to the US are only i think 7% of their economy, and their savings rate is much more than that, so it'd only mean they get richer more slowly. They could keep helping us out for a couple years or tomorrow they could stop throwing good money after bad.
Taking that as my long term view, it's kinda hard for me to get too riled up over the "obama damage" unless it looks like its going to seriously hurt me before shit falls apart. Afterward I'm the invisible man.
/me smacks Gavan with a trout.
Wake up! Guess where we're all coming to live when the U.S falls apart. That's right. Canada. You've been warned... hehe.
This administration has a definite Orwellian feel to it; if you're not agreeing with the ObamaCare plan, you are part of a "crazy mob" or you're a rabble-rousing plant from the health insurance companies. The difference is stark: This time, they aren't limiting their attacks to opposing political figures, they're aiming their rhetoric and veiled threats at the public individuals who dare disagree with them.
I'm beginning to think that Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress are starting to believe their own hype.
Don't get me wrong, I want lower healthcare costs as well, my insurance goes up around 10% per year. But offering better care for EVERYONE won't be less expensive, it will be MORE expensive. I'm not sure how well this plan was thought out. In order to save cost, you must sacrifice care and benefits. It's basic logic, something I think the Democrats do not have a handle on.
Wake up! Guess where we're all coming to live when the U.S falls apart. That's right. Canada. You've been warned... hehe.
This administration has a definite Orwellian feel to it; if you're not agreeing with the ObamaCare plan, you are part of a "crazy mob" or you're a rabble-rousing plant from the health insurance companies. The difference is stark: This time, they aren't limiting their attacks to opposing political figures, they're aiming their rhetoric and veiled threats at the public individuals who dare disagree with them.
I'm beginning to think that Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress are starting to believe their own hype.
Don't get me wrong, I want lower healthcare costs as well, my insurance goes up around 10% per year. But offering better care for EVERYONE won't be less expensive, it will be MORE expensive. I'm not sure how well this plan was thought out. In order to save cost, you must sacrifice care and benefits. It's basic logic, something I think the Democrats do not have a handle on.