|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 580
My Mood: 
Thanks: 1
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kblair7
Well by that logic you should call all Democrats tree-hugging, hippy, big-government, big taxers, communists, socialist, and anti-american...
|
No, those are Republican "Talking points" which fall so easily form your lips, and are what the Right calls Democrats.
Whereas Democrats are what they are, we know the Republican Party is the Looney Bin of American politics (Paul himself an exemplar), with crackpots of every stripe and persuasion.
Quote:
|
That is of course, a load of crap. Your characterization of Republicans is also inaccurate. Not every republican supports the NRA, or is a "religious nut."
|
The point of my OP, had you cared to read it for content, was: no matter who the Republican President is, he will and has always been silent whenever the Right Wing crackpots do their thing.
It is not then a strict requirement from the Party that the Republican President speak out publicly against his Parties crackpots or their lunatic fringe. Fact of the matter is, every Republican President, by silent acquiescence, give them courage to speak out following their old dictum of "Thou shalt not speak ill of any Republican".
Quote:
|
You have to keep in mind that politics, especially party politics is like a giant social mirror.
|
Of what? Most Americans simply want to be able to work, raise their children and live in peace, no politics-no “color” involved.
It is the utterly venal, irrationally fascist nature of modern Republican politics that keeps this nation roiled up, one against another.
Quote:
|
People want gun-toting, religious zealots (well 28% of republican voters), the rest probably don't.
|
See how you started that paragraph, using fascist language in trying to make a dubious point? Not only was your “People want gun-toting, religious zealots” a bald-faced lie you instantly ameliorated by saying: “([/i]well 28% of republican voters[/i]), you Parrot Right Wing talking points with an ease that makes one wonder where your politics really lay?
Quote:
|
I spend many years studying this,
|
“This” what?
Quote:
|
and I can say with some certainty understanding the nature of people's political affiliations is like trying to catch sand in the twisting winds.
|
Bull. Left to their own simplistic devices, “(The) People” have no “politics”: none, not any: nein-nada-zip.
Quote:
|
Ron Paul, is for his faults, probably the closest candidate to the traditional republican platform (pre-1968). I don't support all this initiatives, but the majority of his convictions about how government should serve the people of this country, are right on point.
|
The problem with modern, “Paulist” populism is he nor any other Republican, ever factor in the real cost of normal population growth and the concomitant raises in "The cost of doing GOVERNMENT business for the people", plus the cost of serving an ever growing “Baby Boom” population.
Which means he and all other Republicans always think of and talk of “cutting costs” when the cost of “government”, not counting doing the minimums to repair our failing infrastructure, will grow as the millions of Baby Boomers come on line.
While the general population is diminishing in proportion to the number of Baby Boomers, and we will have to educate fewer children per capita, the population as a whole will continue to grow, thus demand more “government services”, which he and again, Republicans think can be done in 2020 with the same budget we have in 2007: stupid Republicans and equally gullible people believe them in spite of the coming calamities in Medicare, Health Care-etc.
Quote:
|
He is also correct in stating we have strayed far off the path of being the greatest nation, not just because of military power, because we as Americans no longer have the moral fiber to step up and hold our leaders accountable for their crimes. That I also agree with.
|
Hint: [i]No people throughout history, of any nation, have ever had the “moral fiber” to step up and hold their leaders accountable: nowhere in history. Worse for that far too simplistic solution to “good government”, only by raising the highest qualified person to position of power could any “people” hope to be served as they should be.
Quote:
|
He would be a far better leader than Clinton, or Obama.
|
You don’t like Obama, of them all the only person with “people skills” and at the same time, can be thought of as being “of” the people?
Which of the other candidates have done “grunt” work inner cities and Barrios? Which of the others of them has a firm grasp on the problems of the elderly, the poor, the lame and halt?
Which of the others were, as Obama clearly was- prescient about this dirty little war of Dubya’s, his lazer vision slicing through the lies, smokescreens and diplomatic Bullshit?
Where and when was Paul’s voice, raised in stentorian anger in opposition to the war?
Last edited by al Asaad; 12-13-2007 at 05:09 PM.
|