quote: Still, I maintain that when one side calls the other traitors, and people out to purposeless wreck the country because they literally HATE America, and that compares them with terrorists...that is a whole lot worse than the other side calling them stupid. Given what they are saying, I'd say that IS pretty stupid.
This is just a gross misrepresentation of what's going on, Lyr, and I'm suprised you don't see that. Liberal commentators aren't just accusing Republican leadership of being stupid. They're accusing them of being corrupt, selling our soldiers' blood for oil, and comparing them to both terrorists and dictators...that is a whole lot worse than the other side calling them evil. Except of course, that's not all the other side is doing, as you pointed out. Both sides say awful things about the other; if you want to try to compare the "awfulness" between your examples and my examples I suppose we could do that, but it seems rather fruitless to me.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Republicans may have a strong new world view, and they might even think they are doing a good job and remaking the world in their image, but for the last few years, Republicans have been horrible at governing this nation. They haven't solved ANY problems, even their energy bill was largely a joke that won't get anything done for years and years, if then. They've either underfunded Bush's good ideas, or ignored them. And not Bush just looks like a toothless tiger growling at the wind. Oh, and by the way, if you want to see someone be condescending and act like everyone else has stupid, have you EVER seen the President speak in public? That's all he does.
I dont think it is seriously fair to say that the Republican's have not done any good over the last six years. I think a big part of this view is exactly the same as what you were saying about the democratic party earlier.
You stated that the democrats are taking a stand its just that the Republicans bash them back down every time. Well whenever the Republicans make good policy it gets swept under the frenzy of the democrats and the media screeming about everything else.
There have been bills that the democrats and the republicans agreed on and the republicans have done some good for this country. ONe example is that there an almost annual depression in america. It happens like every 18 years. Check a history book and clock out all the depressions, the patterns there. Well this same depression happened during Bush's presidency. And it has been one of the weakest depressions in the history of the US.
Posts: 832 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not a gross misrepresentation. The Republicans haven't been doing a very good job lately of proving they AREN'T corrupt, what with all the convictions and charges being leveled against them, and by people who have been known for going after democrats in the past.
Calling Republicans stupid and corrupt, when they are running the government into the ground and are being charged left and right with criminal charges is NOT worse than Republicans calling Democrats hateful traitors out to destroy America.
Maybe in the end both sides are equal, I doubt we'll ever find someone non-partisan enough to really give an honest interpretation of which is worse. But, calling your enemy a traitor makes a new problem, it doesn't just not solve the old problem, or make the old problem worse. Whereas calling your opponent stupid and corrupt DOES, to be quite honest. Stupidity and corruption in government NEED to be pointed out.
But I'll agree this is a fruitless argument, and there's no point to having it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Republicans may have a strong new world view, and they might even think they are doing a good job and remaking the world in their image, but for the last few years, Republicans have been horrible at governing this nation. They haven't solved ANY problems, even their energy bill was largely a joke that won't get anything done for years and years, if then. They've either underfunded Bush's good ideas, or ignored them. And not Bush just looks like a toothless tiger growling at the wind. Oh, and by the way, if you want to see someone be condescending and act like everyone else has stupid, have you EVER seen the President speak in public? That's all he does.
I dont think it is seriously fair to say that the Republican's have not done any good over the last six years. I think a big part of this view is exactly the same as what you were saying about the democratic party earlier.
You stated that the democrats are taking a stand its just that the Republicans bash them back down every time. Well whenever the Republicans make good policy it gets swept under the frenzy of the democrats and the media screeming about everything else.
There have been bills that the democrats and the republicans agreed on and the republicans have done some good for this country. ONe example is that there an almost annual depression in america. It happens like every 18 years. Check a history book and clock out all the depressions, the patterns there. Well this same depression happened during Bush's presidency. And it has been one of the weakest depressions in the history of the US.
Bull. Republicans are in control. They have a majority in both houses, and it doesn't matter what the Democrats are hollering about, at the end of the day the Republicans still have the power to make whatever law they want really. Whether or not it gets struck down by a higher power, or in the court of public opinion, that's another matter. But Republicans CANNOT use Democrats as an excuse for not getting anything done. Republicans don't need Democrats to get something done.
And don't try and blame the media, that's bull too. We can argue until the cows come home about whether or not the media is democrat or republican these days. I think print media is probably more liberal, while radio is overwhelmingly conservative. I think television falls somewhere in between and probably ends up balancing out depending on what station you are watching, and who is on. Don't blame the weakness of the Republicans on the media, or the Democrats. They have only themselves to blame for not getting anything done.
How is the softness of this "depression" in any way an example of something good the Republicans have done? So far as I can tell, they've driven us deeply into debt with no sign of their out of control spending being reigned in any time soon. Give me an example of good Republican ideas falling underneat the furor of screaming media and Democrats. Better yet, don't bother, just explain to me how Democrats or the media stopped them from passing the legislation at the end of the day?
Republicans have been passing the buck. And blaming the Democrats or the media isn't going to hold water come election time.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: But I'll agree this is a fruitless argument, and there's no point to having it.
-BUt as long as you dont let it get personal it is fun.
As to earlier. Im just stating that I think the Republicans have done a lot of bad and a lot of good during this administration. And I dont see how u can say that the republicans can some how hide everything the democrats ever say and then state that the democrats have no power to do the same thing to the republicans. The republicans might have the majority but the democrats are far from powerless.
Posts: 832 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I dont think it is seriously fair to say that the Republican's have not done any good over the last six years.
Hm. I think it IS fair to say this. Seriously, no matter how hard I try, I can't come up with a single decision by this administration or Congress that I consider an unqualified good.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I quite like a small subset of the administration's decisions with regard to taxes (not all their tax positions, but a few of them) and trade barriers (though there have been missteps, this has been the most firmly free trade administration in decades). Also, the administration is generally sensible on administration policy, though unfortunately it is also hamstrung by its cohorts.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
fugu, You should note that Tom said "unqualified good". You definitely state qualifcation. Even then, I don't agree with you.
This administration trade policies are definitely on my negative list.
I suppose if I went through every bit of tax policy that this administration has proposed line by line I might find some fraction of some piece of legislation that I thought was acceptable, but I'm not actually aware of any.
I'm with Tom of this one. I can't think of any decision made by this administration that I consider unqualified good.
BTW, What to you mean by "administration policy"? Was that a typo?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well whenever the Republicans make good policy it gets swept under the frenzy of the democrats and the media screeming about everything else.
I'm seriously interest to see and example of this. Not so I could argue with it but because it so completely different from the what I've seen the administration and congress doing for the past 6 years that I it really makes me wonder what I've missed.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn> I understand what you're saying. I just have a hard time associating Democrats of any stripe with fiscal responsibility. Clearly the current batch of Republicans is not fiscally responsible; but my gut tells me that the Dems will just choose a different path to doom. (I don't listen to my gut very often, see?)
As for picking fights--we're not picking fights, we're acknowledging the fights that already exist and putting an end to them. Unfortunately, we're going about it in the wrong way. I'm not sure what the right way is, and I'm not sure that the Democrats know what the right way is, and I'm half afraid they will tell the country to go back to sleep and let the diplomats handle everything. Americans have a dangerous tendency to isolationism at the worst possible times.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I just have a hard time associating Democrats of any stripe with fiscal responsibility. Clearly the current batch of Republicans is not fiscally responsible; but my gut tells me that the Dems will just choose a different path to doom.
I guess it depends on what you call fiscally responsible. FDR, for example, insisted that WW II would not be fought on loans and increased taxes to cover the cost of the war. He wasn't completely successful and debts were incurred during WW II but those debts were largely paid off withing 3 to 4 years of the end of the war, under another democratic president.
The national debt then remained relatively constant (when adjusted for inflation) even during the Korean and Vietnam wars until Reagan when it sky rocketed. Under the Clinton administration the inflation adjusted debt dropped but then it skyrocket again under the current administration.
The democrats get alot of flack for being fiscally irresponsible, but all you have to do is look at the stats to see that the most irresponsible fiscal policies of the last century have been under the leadership of republicans.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is some more data that shows National Debt as a percent of GDP. From WW II through the end of the Carter Presidents, the National Debt dropped monotonously from 90% of GDP at the end of WW II to about 35% of GDP when Reagan took office. During Reagan/Bush I admins, it grew to nearly 70% of the GDP. It dropped slightly under Clinton but has grown dramatically under Bush II.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Also, I'm talking about policy fields, so of course I'm qualifying. Endorsing an entire policy field would be nearly as silly as saying "I think all of the administration's policies are unqualified goods".
There are specific trade actions taken by this administration that I think were unqualified goods. There are specific tax actions taken by this administration that I think were unqualified goods. There are specific immigration stances that I think were unqualified goods (though those have had to be compromised, sadly).
(Note I'm not taking unqualified to mean no negative consequences; such an animal does not exist in public policy. I mean they are the best policy choice available on the issue).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are specific trade actions taken by this administration that I think were unqualified goods. There are specific tax actions taken by this administration that I think were unqualified goods.
Which ones, specifically?
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The refusal to use tariffs in a vain attempt to stop outsourcing. The opposition to imposing a ridiculous tariff on Chinese goods. Pursuing the FTAA full blast. Standing by the ports deal. Capital gains cuts. Consolidation and reduction of tax brackets.
That's a goodly percentage of them.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rabbit> You're quite right that it's more fiscally responsible to raise taxes and pay as you go, or to pay off any debts accrued as quickly as possible. I'm a very recent convert (as of night before last) to the idea that taxes currently need increasing, despite having just paid as much as a third of my liquid assets in income tax.
But, ultimately, I think it's still more fiscally responsible to not accrue expenses in the first place. Since Americans refuse to allow spending cuts, better tax increases than nothing. But it would be more sensible to cut spending, and I think people will come around after they find themselves paying through the nose.
Since this has morphed into a general political discussion, I think it may be best to let it die.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
The basis of the Democratic budget balancing plan, in the words of Howard Dean especially, is to cut what they see as wasteful Republican spending by the billions. They want to get rid of the last round of Bush tax cuts, but do not want to introduce any NEW taxes that didn't exist before the cuts were made. Return revenue to where it was, and cut spending back down to where it was, all before the current Congress screwed it all up with out of control spending.
They know that any new programs they might want to put forth will cost money, so it is in their best interest to cut as much fat from the budget as possible to leave them with more funds later to use for possible program initiatives and funding.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn> Other than the war budget, and some pork projects that are disgusting but minor in practical terms, I'm not recalling what it is that the Democrats see as wasteful spending.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Billions upon billions being doled out to special interests and indeed some pork projects that all add up in the end. Billions being given to oil companies and other energy concerns when they clearly don't need it.
It's the discretionary spending they have the biggest problem with. Spending has ballooned under the Republicans, it isn't just the war budget. We're still hundreds of billions in the hole every year, and that isn't including the money being spent on Iraq.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I am reading these it brings to mind a conversation I had yesterday with the RNC. I had called them (for the 8th time in 4 months) to be taken off of their mailing list. So yesterday I tell them I don't even know where you are getting my name from, I am not now and have never been a registered republican. They tell me you own a business Mrs Smith? I tell them yes. They say and you are a democrat, I say no, same as with republicans, I am not now and I have never been a democrat. So they start to tell me about the benefits of a business owner being a republican. I tell them I am not interested in this, I am interested in getting off of the mailing/calling list. These people at the RNC are so closed minded that they think that I would change a world view over money. It reinforced my belief that many of these people are driven by money. Following in that same line of thinking a poster wrote something to the effect of the best way to make a liberal a republican is to have them move out of the house, get a job, and pay taxes. This makes no sense there is actually such a skewed view out there that someone would rather change vies than part with some tax money. Well let me say, I am long out of college, long out of my mommy's house (she's in mine actually now) and have long been putting too much of what I make into tax money, happily. Why? Because I will not change my morals for the sake of a little money. I will live in a box first.
Posts: 63 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I am reading these it brings to mind a conversation I had yesterday with the RNC. I had called them (for the 8th time in 4 months) to be taken off of their mailing list. So yesterday I tell them I don't even know where you are getting my name from, I am not now and have never been a registered republican. They tell me you own a business Mrs Smith? I tell them yes. They say and you are a democrat, I say no, same as with republicans, I am not now and I have never been a democrat. So they start to tell me about the benefits of a business owner being a republican. I tell them I am not interested in this, I am interested in getting off of the mailing/calling list. These people at the RNC are so closed minded that they think that I would change a world view over money. It reinforced my belief that many of these people are driven by money. Following in that same line of thinking a poster wrote something to the effect of the best way to make a liberal a republican is to have them move out of the house, get a job, and pay taxes. This makes no sense there is actually such a skewed view out there that someone would rather change vies than part with some tax money. Well let me say, I am long out of college, long out of my mommy's house (she's in mine actually now) and have long been putting too much of what I make into tax money, happily. Why? Because I will not change my morals for the sake of a little money. I will live in a box first.
Posts: 63 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Right, Lyrhawn, because Republicans are the only ones who introduce pork into the appropriations bills.
You realize that almost all of the complaints you're making about the Republican party are complaints that were made about the Democratic party right before the 1994 elections. I'm sure that gives you confidence. However, for someone who's nonpartisan like me and looking at how well that worked out for the country, I'm not exactly jumping for joy.
You forget that you can't just argue that the Republicans are bad, you have to demonstrate how the Democrats will be better. So far, that hasn't been demonstrated to me yet, and I don't have much confidence in it happening anytime in the near future.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Republicans are responsible in multibillion dollar giveaways to oil companies, and for a host of other things. Republicans have overseen a massive more than hundred billion dollar increase in non-defense discretionary spending in the last 6 years.
So far as pork in appropriations bills you are right, but as was said that is the lower of the evils. Republicans keep slapping down Democratic proposed legislation to cut waste, and for that matter, have failed to put into law their OWN recommendations on trimming BILLIONS in waste from the government.
Democrats have at least proposed the idea that reductions should be made in spending, and seem hellbent on doing it. With the Republicans out of the way, I say give them a try. It's better than more of the same from the spend crazy Republicans.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the best solution is a government split up a lot. I think my favored outcome in the next election is Republicans can have the Senate (the best body for stalling), a near split in the house with either Democrats or Republicans in charge, and a Democrat as President.
I don't much care who the President is, person-wise, with a few exceptions.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and Lyrhawn. There have been Republicans pursuing reductions in spending too. Unfortunately, the number of such people who actually vote that position in either party is small. Democrats have been contributing plenty of pork this season, in exchange for things such as not fighting certain Republican efforts or collaborating on opposition to Bush with Senate Republicans. When there are insufficient checks on either party, both parties go whole hog.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
