My take on the Republican "wave"...

[CosmicCowboy]

I think the liberals and the media are getting it wrong...The Tea Party is loud and gets the coverage but it's the solid center of fiscal conservatives that was the big difference in this election and will be more and more important in the future...

I went to a election watching party for a successful state legislative candidate Tuesday night and an interesting spontaneous conversation started about politics among 6 or 8 of us while we were waiting for results...There were some serious local heavy hitters in the conversation...I was definitely the lightweight of the crowd...

I was extremely surprised that we were all virtually unanimous in our take on the current Republican party...

We ALL were fiscal conservatives and social libertarians...by that, I mean that we believed in limiting the size and scope of government INCLUDING all the classic "republican" social issues...

Abortion? Republicans need to just shut up and get over it. Just quit talking about it...Gay Marriage?...big deal...we just don't fucking care...

We all wanted smaller more responsive government that stays the fuck out of our personal lives...

[Stringer_Bell]

I'm pretty sure 70% of the country feels the same way, live within your financial means and be socially acceptable of other lifestyles. My problem with the Tea Party Express and the GOP is that they bitch and moan, rally up support and bring people into the fold, without having a plan - and for some reason people are proud to be a part of that. It's okay to spit acid at everything Liberal or in opposition to your POV, but at least have a plan. No one has any plans to help the American people, it's stupid but it's been the same cycle over and over for decades.

[Shelly]

I'm with you, CC

[ChumpDumper]

I'll believe it when I see it.

At the moment I expect more spending and intrusive government from the Republicans.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm with you. Hopefully the Rs in charge in D.C. are with us.

[Winehole23]

(The beards have all grown longer overnight.)

[Cry Havoc]

I'll believe it when I see it.

At the moment I expect more spending and intrusive government from the Republicans.

They're already talking about repealing Obama's new clean energy plans.

YAY! More dependence on foreign oil! Just the thing to pull this country out of debt!

[CosmicCowboy]

They're already talking about repealing Obama's new clean energy plans.

YAY! More dependence on foreign oil! Just the thing to pull this country out of debt!

Some of that clean energy stuff is just plain dumb. I mean, I appreciate him giving me $14,000 worth of free golf carts last year (that were made in Korea) but it was still stupid of them to offer it and I would have been stupid not to take it.

[Parker2112]

They're already talking about repealing Obama's new clean energy plans.

YAY! More dependence on foreign oil! Just the thing to pull this country out of debt!

My take on clean energy: We need it desperately, but at this point can we afford it?

Which leads me to the biggest question: Is this entire depression simply the result of a businesses anticipating new massive regs and freezing the game/raising unemployment/refusing to hire to keep voters in pain to avoid the onset of new govt demands?

Little Johnny sees the spoon full of syrup and kicks Mommy in the shin in the hopes that she will spill it and he wont have to swallow?

Ive heard this in bits and peices from the conservative crowd around here...anybody have an opinion?

[Darrin]

I think the liberals and the media are getting it wrong...The Tea Party is loud and gets the coverage but it's the solid center of fiscal conservatives that was the big difference in this election and will be more and more important in the future...

I went to a election watching party for a successful state legislative candidate Tuesday night and an interesting spontaneous conversation started about politics among 6 or 8 of us while we were waiting for results...There were some serious local heavy hitters in the conversation...I was definitely the lightweight of the crowd...

I was extremely surprised that we were all virtually unanimous in our take on the current Republican party...

We ALL were fiscal conservatives and social libertarians...by that, I mean that we believed in limiting the size and scope of government INCLUDING all the classic "republican" social issues...

Abortion? Republicans need to just shut up and get over it. Just quit talking about it...Gay Marriage?...big deal...we just don't fucking care...

We all wanted smaller more responsive government that stays the fuck out of our personal lives...

This is part of candidate Obama's appeal during 2008. He could unite the American people against the corporate interests in in American politics. It aligned Libertarians and Liberals at the same time. I am usually the lightweight in these conversations as well, although I am a liberal across the board.

In practice, what he has done is capitulate to Republicans that want to ruin him and have very little interest of the American people at heart. It's a party that has made the arguments we all agree on while protecting the interests of those that were put into office. I offer the Bush Tax Cuts as an example. Rand Paul said it clearer than just about anyone: "Picking on rich people when we sell them things or work for them hurts us all." There, for the rich's money is your job. To tax them means they will cut back and put you out of work instead of taking it out of their profits and profitability. Instead of having a problem with that when when we have budget shortfalls in States, falling revenues across the board, and the effect of the Bush Tax Cuts themselves on the econony (it wasn't a job creator nor did it grow the middle class), is insane. It's protecting a broken system.

If President Obama is able to see this, he has not indicated it. If President Obama is fighting against this wave of misinformation, recycled Repbulicans, and exploitation of outrage, I have yet to see his methods. That is why he's a bad leader. That's my take.

[Parker2112]

the thing about Libertarians being on board with Obama's taking on Corp America...thats not true.

Libertarians dont believe in powerful big govt to take on anyone.

When it comes to environmental issues, Libertarians believe that environmental damage should be dealt with pursuant to tort remedies in a court of law.

[Parker2112]

This is part of candidate Obama's appeal during 2008. He could unite the American people against the corporate interests in in American politics. It aligned Libertarians and Liberals at the same time. I am usually the lightweight in these conversations as well, although I am a liberal across the board.

In practice, what he has done is capitulate to Republicans that want to ruin him and have very little interest of the American people at heart. It's a party that has made the arguments we all agree on while protecting the interests of those that were put into office. I offer the Bush Tax Cuts as an example. Rand Paul said it clearer than just about anyone: "Picking on rich people when we sell them things or work for them hurts us all." There, for the rich's money is your job. To tax them means they will cut back and put you out of work instead of taking it out of their profits and profitability. Instead of having a problem with that when when we have budget shortfalls in States, falling revenues across the board, and the effect of the Bush Tax Cuts themselves on the econony (it wasn't a job creator nor did it grow the middle class), is insane. It's protecting a broken system.

If President Obama is able to see this, he has not indicated it. If President Obama is fighting against this wave of misinformation, recycled Repbulicans, and exploitation of outrage, I have yet to see his methods. That is why he's a bad leader. That's my take.

Very solid take otherwise.

[MannyIsGod]

Anecdotes aside exit polls continue to point to the economy. The way people involved in politics feel and the way the voting public feel are 2 different things. Trust me on this - I found out firsthand between 2008 and now.

What motivates people who inform themselves and the general voting public is not the same even if they come to the same decision.

[MannyIsGod]

This is part of candidate Obama's appeal during 2008. He could unite the American people against the corporate interests in in American politics. It aligned Libertarians and Liberals at the same time. I am usually the lightweight in these conversations as well, although I am a liberal across the board.

In practice, what he has done is capitulate to Republicans that want to ruin him and have very little interest of the American people at heart. It's a party that has made the arguments we all agree on while protecting the interests of those that were put into office. I offer the Bush Tax Cuts as an example. Rand Paul said it clearer than just about anyone: "Picking on rich people when we sell them things or work for them hurts us all." There, for the rich's money is your job. To tax them means they will cut back and put you out of work instead of taking it out of their profits and profitability. Instead of having a problem with that when when we have budget shortfalls in States, falling revenues across the board, and the effect of the Bush Tax Cuts themselves on the econony (it wasn't a job creator nor did it grow the middle class), is insane. It's protecting a broken system.

If President Obama is able to see this, he has not indicated it. If President Obama is fighting against this wave of misinformation, recycled Repbulicans, and exploitation of outrage, I have yet to see his methods. That is why he's a bad leader. That's my take.

Yup.

[Parker2112]

The shit about being "against corp interests" was a fraud, or else he had his hands tied on day 1 in office.

[Blake]

Little Johnny sees the spoon full of syrup and kicks Mommy in the shin in the hopes that she will spill it and he wont have to swallow?


are you the Little Johnny in this story?

[MannyIsGod]

You're hard pressed to find many educated people or informed people who aren't socially liberal. But too many people are stupid out there. Quite frankly, the GOP appeals to those people through being socially conservative and they aren't going to stop doing that in places such as the south.

Meet the new GOP - same as the old GOP.

[101A]

You're hard pressed to find many educated people or informed people who aren't socially liberal.


No, I'm not hard pressed to find people like that. By definition, however, I can only answer with anecdotal evidence; but that statement is very broad, and although the (highest) educated among us (academics specifically) tend to be more socially liberal; you made a statement encompassing ALL educated and ALL informed.

I don't believe that is accurate.

[Winehole23]

Which leads me to the biggest question: Is this entire depression simply the result of a businesses anticipating new massive regs and freezing the game/raising unemployment/refusing to hire to keep voters in pain to avoid the onset of new govt demands?You and WC need to talk.

[Stringer_Bell]

This is part of candidate Obama's appeal during 2008. He could unite the American people against the corporate interests in in American politics. It aligned Libertarians and Liberals at the same time. I am usually the lightweight in these conversations as well, although I am a liberal across the board.

In practice, what he has done is capitulate to Republicans that want to ruin him and have very little interest of the American people at heart. It's a party that has made the arguments we all agree on while protecting the interests of those that were put into office. I offer the Bush Tax Cuts as an example. Rand Paul said it clearer than just about anyone: "Picking on rich people when we sell them things or work for them hurts us all." There, for the rich's money is your job. To tax them means they will cut back and put you out of work instead of taking it out of their profits and profitability. Instead of having a problem with that when when we have budget shortfalls in States, falling revenues across the board, and the effect of the Bush Tax Cuts themselves on the econony (it wasn't a job creator nor did it grow the middle class), is insane. It's protecting a broken system.

If President Obama is able to see this, he has not indicated it. If President Obama is fighting against this wave of misinformation, recycled Repbulicans, and exploitation of outrage, I have yet to see his methods. That is why he's a bad leader. That's my take.

Protecting a broken system, you said it.

[MannyIsGod]

No, I'm not hard pressed to find people like that. By definition, however, I can only answer with anecdotal evidence; but that statement is very broad, and although the (highest) educated among us (academics specifically) tend to be more socially liberal; you made a statement encompassing ALL educated and ALL informed.

I don't believe that is accurate.

Read my statement again. I didn't use the word all.

[Parker2112]

You and WC need to talk.

I see the signs on my gas pump, in store windows, etc.: Cap and Trade is going to be the death of us all! $10 gas! $5 bread!

There is some amount of coordination there. At least they went to the trouble of making signs. Did they coordinate a simultaneous economic slowdown to go with the signs?

[MannyIsGod]

The future speaker's announcement on wanting to spend time investigating scientific fraud tells me a lot about his seriousness and desire to focus on important issues.

[Parker2112]

The future speaker's announcement on wanting to spend time investigating scientific fraud tells me a lot about his seriousness and desire to focus on important issues.

Actually, it speaks on a coordinated effort to avoid burdensome new regs.

Which supports my conspiracy theory above.

[MannyIsGod]

There's no danger of new regs.

[Parker2112]

There's no danger of new regs.

But why not gain ground against possible attempts to implement cap and trade in the future?

[Parker2112]

if not for that purpose, then why attack science?

[DarrinS]

The future speaker's announcement on wanting to spend time investigating scientific fraud tells me a lot about his seriousness and desire to focus on important issues.


You don't think cap and trade is a huge issue?

[CosmicCowboy]

There's no danger of new regs.

On the contrary I expect extensive new regs to come out of the executive branch via the EPA, etc. Congress can only stop it by defunding it and they won't get that passed.

[Parker2112]

On the contrary I expect extensive new regs to come out of the executive branch via the EPA, etc. Congress can only stop it by defunding it and they won't get that passed.

New Regulatory requirements can be defeated through litigation.

[Winehole23]

New Regulatory requirements can be defeated through litigation.Risky. They can also be upheld through the same process.

[MannyIsGod]

if not for that purpose, then why attack science?

Um, hello? Political gain?

[MannyIsGod]

But why not gain ground against possible attempts to implement cap and trade in the future?

If this is their aim then I don't see how it contradicts what I posted.

[MannyIsGod]

You don't think cap and trade is a huge issue?

Its a dead issue.

[MannyIsGod]

On the contrary I expect extensive new regs to come out of the executive branch via the EPA, etc. Congress can only stop it by defunding it and they won't get that passed.

Like what? The EPA can't really do a damn thing without further legislation. I'll believe it once it happens.

[Parker2112]

Risky. They can also be upheld through the same process.

true.

[Sportcamper]

Way back when, during the “Dan Quayle / Al Gore” debates…I was shocked that Dan Quayle was heckled for speaking up for the protection of the unborn…Now 20 years later, Republicans are to shut up & get over it? Shocking! It is a human life we are speaking of…The U.S. government should not be in the business of promoting & funding abortions in this country or any other…The reason that the Republican Party is so pathetic is that they have no backbone when it comes to morality; they roll over on every hot potato issue to avoid conflict…

As far as Republicans “now” being fiscal conservatives, when did that happen…This same party who inherited a huge surplus from Bill Clinton & in a matter of months turned it into a deficit?

Many Americans are fed up with both parties & want an alternative…Yet every time a unique person comes along who wants to deal with the reality of responsible spending they are ridiculed & called whacko’s or emotionally unstable…See Barry Goldwater, Roger McBride, Ross Perot, Steve Forbes, Ron Paul and I guess now the Tea Party…

[Parker2112]

Like what? The EPA can't really do a damn thing without further legislation. I'll believe it once it happens.

EPA can run roughshod if they so choose. Take a look at how the Bush admin tied their hands, and you see the scope of executive discretion on full display

[Parker2112]

Obama admin would be more inclined to go through EPA to tighten up emissions requirements now that legislation is impossible.

[Spurminator]

if not for that purpose, then why attack science?

Next time you see a bumper sticker that reads Darwinism: Fact-Free "Science" on the back of a pick-up truck come back and ask the question again.

[Parker2112]

Next time you see a bumper sticker that reads Darwinism: Fact-Free "Science" on the back of a pick-up truck come back and ask the question again.

general attitudes dont usually find their way into legislators agendas. My take: Repubs are trying to dismantle any chance that any cap and trade legislation is EVER passed.

[MannyIsGod]

Obama admin would be more inclined to go through EPA to tighten up emissions requirements now that legislation is impossible.

The threat of this happening is hardly worth what the GOP has in mind.

[MannyIsGod]

general attitudes dont usually find their way into legislators agendas. My take: Repubs are trying to dismantle any chance that any cap and trade legislation is EVER passed.

:lol what?

This can't be serious.

[MannyIsGod]

There's no doubt this is an attempt to discredit the scientific community on global warming, parker. I've got no doubt that the GOP wants to avoid future run ins with cap and trade.

The point of contention is whether or not during a time of economic crisis with no imminent threat of cap and trade (if the Dems couldn't pass it with 60 in the senate then?) why the fuck are the focusing on this other than political grandstanding.

I wish Obama would fuck an intern if for no other reason than to save science becoming anymore bastardized by our fucking "leaders".

[ChumpDumper]

Some of that clean energy stuff is just plain dumb. I mean, I appreciate him giving me $14,000 worth of free golf carts last year (that were made in Korea) but it was still stupid of them to offer it and I would have been stupid not to take it.So you are for sucking off the government teat when it gets you golf carts.

This is the reason for my skepticism.

[Parker2112]

:lol what?

This can't be serious.

Influence yes. But to think that this is just a general attack on the scientific community "just because" is not realistic. The repubs have power, and they are going to try to hit while they have a hammer in hand.

[Winehole23]

I don't see why it can't be both. Seems like a false dilemma to me.

[MannyIsGod]

Its not "just because" - I told you flat out that the reasoning is political. Why govern when you can grandstand?

[Parker2112]

The point of contention is whether or not during a time of economic crisis with no imminent threat of cap and trade (if the Dems couldn't pass it with 60 in the senate then?)

two things:
1. political agendas can last over decades. Just look at how long Dems have been fighting for health care.
2. Even though the issue is dead in US as of this second, the issue is not dead internationally, and much of the contingent who would have us set up an international cap and trade system is not located in this country.

This issue will allow many international interests to profit big, and it also has implications for our allies and our foes abroad, so Repubs may see this as fighting against our tax dollars flowing off shore in future decades.

I am a believer in the beneficial potential of cap and trade to move tech and to curb pollutants, but I also believe that it is already impossible for us to implement such a scheme without immediate corruption. I think the issue has become politicized and greed has seen $$$ profit potential, and if we put C&T in place we will be delivering our tax $$$ into corrupt international hands.

This is why my faith in govt solutions to problems continues to wane.

[MannyIsGod]

Man, you are missing my point.

Spending time on shit that may come up a decade from now shows your level of seriousness when you have imminent problems that should be addressed NOW.

[Parker2112]

Oil/Coal lobby, which IS Repub party, probably will never see cap and trade as anything but priority number 1.

The prospect of diminishing returns on their ownership interests under the ground at any point in the future probably results in nightsweats for the lot of them.

[coyotes_geek]

Oil/Coal lobby, which IS Repub party, probably will never see cap and trade as anything but priority number 1.

The prospect of diminishing returns on their ownership interests under the ground at any point in the future probably results in nightsweats for the lot of them.

Cap and trade opposition isn't just limited to oil & coal. The unions don't like it either because it will push more "dirty" manufacturing jobs out of the country. If you're GM for example, what would you rather do? Play the whole cap and trade bullshit game or just go build more cars in Mexico or China where they don't give a shit about carbon footprints?

[Winehole23]

Oil/Coal lobby, which IS Repub party, probably will never see cap and trade as anything but priority number 1.

[Parker2112]

you disagree? how?

[MannyIsGod]

Parker you're so busy posting you don't take enough time to read what is posted. You really need to work on your listening - or in this case - reading skills.

[Winehole23]

you disagree?Just noting the similarity. Great minds think alike.

[Parker2112]

Just noting the similarity. Great minds think alike.

stay in the fox hole whydontyou.

[MannyIsGod]

stay in the winehole whydontyou.

[Parker2112]

Parker you're so busy posting you don't take enough time to read what is posted. You really need to work on your listening - or in this case - reading skills.

actually you are refusing to face reality. They ARE doing this for a reason. I am giving you possibilities as to why. You are saying they shouldnt be doing this. But thats just not the case.

[Winehole23]

stay in the fox hole whydontyou.Crass economic reductionism suits you. It's not my cup of tea, but you're certainly welcome to it.

(I wouldn't deprive anyone of a mental crutch they really need.)

[Winehole23]

Anyone who refuses to be an echo of me is turning their back on reality.

[MannyIsGod]

I must be typing in Spanish.

[Winehole23]

Parker's does monologues. Conversation isn't really his bag. Like you said, not only is he incurious about what others say, he doesn't really bother to pay attention in the first place.

[Parker2112]

I must be typing in Spanish.


The point of contention is whether or not during a time of economic crisis with no imminent threat of cap and trade (if the Dems couldn't pass it with 60 in the senate then?) why the fuck are the focusing on this other than political grandstanding.

thats the question Ive been answering this whole time.

Not sure what else you want to address at this point.

[Parker2112]

I contribute criticism of other posters. Thats what I do. Dont ask me to put myself out there much. Cuz thats not what I do. The last thing I want to do is put my knickers on display.

[Winehole23]

thats the question Ive been answering this whole time.The confusion is understandable. Your answer sounded more like an lame excuse for political grandstanding than a real reason to me.

[Parker2112]

The point of contention is whether or not during a time of economic crisis with no imminent threat of cap and trade (if the Dems couldn't pass it with 60 in the senate then?) why the fuck are the focusing on this other than political grandstanding.

two questions. whether or not, and why. I guess Ive been addressing the why, not the whether or not.

This explains the confusion actually

[MannyIsGod]

The confusion is understandable. Your answer sounded more like an lame excuse for political grandstanding than a real reason to me.

The impeachment of Clinton wasn't grandstanding - it was a strike at the attacks aimed at our nation's values for decades to come!

[Winehole23]

<zing!>

[MannyIsGod]

To be (a bit) fair my post he's quoting is worded pretty badly and might as well be in Spanish.

[Parker2112]

it does look a bit rushed.

But as to grandstanding, How about they have no agenda until they have power, so in the meantime they just waste time to gel up the machine?

They dont want recovery, because that gives the Obama admin a potential second wind. So lets bind govts hands as tight as possible, and commit public resouces to the type of shit that will never put a single job back in the economy, but that helps us long term, because short term we dont have a plan, and we dont want Dems to successfully implement their plan.

?

[Winehole23]

To be fair my post he's quoting is worded pretty badly and might as well be in SpanishYour awkward phrasing does not diminish Parker's ongoing failure.

[Cry Havoc]

This is part of candidate Obama's appeal during 2008. He could unite the American people against the corporate interests in in American politics. It aligned Libertarians and Liberals at the same time. I am usually the lightweight in these conversations as well, although I am a liberal across the board.

In practice, what he has done is capitulate to Republicans that want to ruin him and have very little interest of the American people at heart. It's a party that has made the arguments we all agree on while protecting the interests of those that were put into office. I offer the Bush Tax Cuts as an example. Rand Paul said it clearer than just about anyone: "Picking on rich people when we sell them things or work for them hurts us all." There, for the rich's money is your job. To tax them means they will cut back and put you out of work instead of taking it out of their profits and profitability. Instead of having a problem with that when when we have budget shortfalls in States, falling revenues across the board, and the effect of the Bush Tax Cuts themselves on the econony (it wasn't a job creator nor did it grow the middle class), is insane. It's protecting a broken system.

If President Obama is able to see this, he has not indicated it. If President Obama is fighting against this wave of misinformation, recycled Repbulicans, and exploitation of outrage, I have yet to see his methods. That is why he's a bad leader. That's my take.

We could really use you posting in here a bit more. That's a great analysis.