Jeb Bush Isn't a Conservative?

[Uncensored2008]

Not bad at the sophistry but, forms of populism have their own principles and all populist movements do. Having principles does not negate any populist label.

There is of course an organized Tea Party with factions and their are the delusional types that show up at rallies called by Sarah Palin where 5 - 40 people show up talking to themselves.

You are like the communists who say because professed communists strayed from the pure ideal of communism there has never been a communist state in the history of the world

Defaming the TEA party has been a long standing objective of the left. Little of what you say is accurate, but the goal is to create a disagreeable impression, no to debate fact.

No, there is no organizational structure. Tom Delay has his group, mostly a Republican stooge group, TEA Party Patriots runs a separate group. Tea Party express is yet another group.

These groups are legitimate, in addition there are some illegitimate Klingons who use the name but in no way support TEA Party ideals. Naturally these fringe elements are what the left use to demonize the TP - in many cases the fringe groups are actually leftists who have only the aim of defaming the movement.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It is dumb of conservatives to support those in their camp/alliance who advocate "gutting science, infrastructure or investment into good ideas."

It's more than dumb, it's supported by the conservatives in order to get votes

Remember though, a dumb conservative is still substantially smarter than a gifted leftist.

 

[percysunshine]

.

If the New York Times were to say anything nice about Jeb Bush, that would pretty much settle the issue of who the DNC would choose as the preferred Republican candidate.

Since when did the New England Patriots get to choose the starting quarterback of the opposing team in the Super Bowl?

.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Not bad at the sophistry but, forms of populism have their own principles and all populist movements do. Having principles does not negate any populist label.

There is of course an organized Tea Party with factions and their are the delusional types that show up at rallies called by Sarah Palin where 5 - 40 people show up talking to themselves.

You are like the communists who say because professed communists strayed from the pure ideal of communism there has never been a communist state in the history of the world

Defaming the TEA party has been a long standing objective of the left. Little of what you say is accurate, but the goal is to create a disagreeable impression, no to debate fact.

No, there is no organizational structure. Tom Delay has his group, mostly a Republican stooge group, TEA Party Patriots runs a separate group. Tea Party express is yet another group.

These groups are legitimate, in addition there are some illegitimate Klingons who use the name but in no way support TEA Party ideals. Naturally these fringe elements are what the left use to demonize the TP - in many cases the fringe groups are actually leftists who have only the aim of defaming the movement.

Defaming? Good gawd, what is defamatory about anything I just posted (aside from the comment on the few delusional types who show up in every movement) about the Tea Party and populism?

The Tea Party defamed itself with angry rants and shouting and other stuff. I am sure there were good things and positives things and feelings if you attended rallies, but you're acting like the people in the front of a crowd who will deny what happened in the back they are cut off from. Can't see the forest for the trees.

I was with Occupy in my city at the time. Very early on. It was wonderful and we did help change the national debate or the focus of it -- (incidentally, away from the Tea Party ) . I would be a fool to deny what the populist tug and the crazed popular democratic rules produced within the movement, but there was lots of support for individual goals and ideals expressed within the cacophony coming out of the movement.

I had Business people in suits and cops on motorcycles laugh and thumbs up on my one sign
"Message to Hedge Fund Managers/Top 1% - Save The Planet Kill Yourselves" T'was fun. Got crazy. I left early on as soon as the public debate shifted from Tea Party nonsense to the wealth divide and more.

The Tea party groups you call legitimate do contradict your assertion that there exists no organizational structure to the Tea Party. The fact that it is comprised of more than most group does not negate the organizational structure of the movement

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It is dumb of conservatives to support those in their camp/alliance who advocate "gutting science, infrastructure or investment into good ideas."

It's more than dumb, it's supported by the conservatives in order to get votes

Remember though, a dumb conservative is still substantially smarter than a gifted leftist.

in your world, maybe so

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

.

If the New York Times were to say anything nice about Jeb Bush, that would pretty much settle the issue of who the DNC would choose as the preferred Republican candidate.

Since when did the New England Patriots get to choose the starting quarterback of the opposing team in the Super Bowl?

.

Seeing that FOX and the WSJ editorial page are arms of the GOP I can see why you'd think all other media are arms of the DNC.

 

[bripat9643]

He's a Bush. He's a Statist scumbag and a member of one of the most evil American families since the Mansons

Remember his brother was a "Compassionate" Conservative?

Yeah. Who needs compassion? That's just evil because it might just cost you a few cents out of your tax dollars.

"Compassion" is a euphemism for "spend like there's no tomorrow."

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

 

[percysunshine]

.

If the New York Times were to say anything nice about Jeb Bush, that would pretty much settle the issue of who the DNC would choose as the preferred Republican candidate.

Since when did the New England Patriots get to choose the starting quarterback of the opposing team in the Super Bowl?

.

Seeing that FOX and the WSJ editorial page are arms of the GOP I can see why you'd think all other media are arms of the DNC.

.

Who ever said that the New York Times was an arm of the DNC? It is the other way around. The DNC political troglodytes take their marching orders from the intelligentsia. Democrats are not that original.

.

 

[Toro]

That he is not considered so by many just shows how rigidly lock-step the Republican base has become with their check-the-box, unimaginative mentality.

Here are two articles recently about Bush's time as governor. He certainly was never criticized as being "too moderate" when he was governor.

Who s a Conservative Jeb Bush Is About to Find Out - Bloomberg Politics

What Kind of Republican is Bush His Time as Governor Offers Clues - WSJ

He's a Bush, so by definition he's a Statist and will only hasten America's slide toward European Socialism.

My opinion is that the entire family is evil: his Dad was CIA Director and tried to assassinate Reagan for not playing ball with the Establishment and Dubya took a "terrorist attack" and turned American into a police state. Jeb? Really? How fucking stupid do you have to be to think anything good can come of another Bush Presidency?

That's pretty nutty, Frank.

No. Not really and I wasn't calling you any names.

The Bush Family is Evil, they sold their souls to the Devil in exchange for fame and political power and the Devil loves to double down on a winning hand.

The day Reagan was shot, Hinckleys brother had dinner plans with Neil Bush. Seriously? That's a coincidence? That's not sending a message?

I have a visceral hatred toward the Bush Clan. If Dante were still handing out seats to the Inferno the Bushes would be down with Judas, Brutus and Cassius.

Again, no offense meant to you my brother

Be well

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

My apologies. I was out of line.

I just don't believe it though.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

bripat9643 t

He's a Bush. He's a Statist scumbag and a member of one of the most evil American families since the Mansons

Remember his brother was a "Compassionate" Conservative?

Yeah. Who needs compassion? That's just evil because it might just cost you a few cents out of your tax dollars.

"Compassion" is a euphemism for "spend like there's no tomorrow."

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

There you go again... whooo-eee! Who ever said anything about 'immorally'? Whack-a-doodle-doo.

Treat everyone equally? WTF is this France? Fairly? yes. equally? no. Dante has consistently said he agrees with the framers of the US Constitution that popular democracy is an evil

 

[bripat9643]

bripat9643 t

He's a Bush. He's a Statist scumbag and a member of one of the most evil American families since the Mansons

Remember his brother was a "Compassionate" Conservative?

Yeah. Who needs compassion? That's just evil because it might just cost you a few cents out of your tax dollars.

"Compassion" is a euphemism for "spend like there's no tomorrow."

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

There you go again... whooo-eee! Who ever said anything about 'immorally'? Whack-a-doodle-doo.

Treat everyone equally? WTF is this France? Fairly? yes. equally? no. Dante has consistently said he agrees with the framers of the US Constitution that popular democracy is an evil

If they obtained their wealth morally, then what entitles anyone to take it? The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it.

Why are you calling me a "shill for the superwealthy" if you believe they deserve to be left alone? The graduated income tax obviously doesn't treat people equally. It treats them differently depending on their income.

 

[gipper]

This is a good summation of the love between America's two ruling families....

Then there are their similar constituencies: what Politico termed “money men” instantly celebrated Jeb Bush’s likely candidacy, while the same publication noted just last month how Wall Street has long been unable to contain its collective glee over a likely Hillary Clinton presidency. The two ruling families have, unsurprisingly, developed a movingly warm relationship befitting their position: the matriarch of the Bush family (former First Lady Barbara) has described the Clinton patriarch (former President Bill) as a virtual family member, noting that her son, George W., affectionately calls his predecessor “my brother by another mother.”

If this happens, the 2016 election would vividly underscore how the American political class functions: by dynasty, plutocracy, fundamental alignment of interests masquerading as deep ideological divisions, and political power translating into vast private wealth and back again. The educative value would be undeniable: somewhat like how the torture report did, it would rub everyone’s noses in exactly those truths they are most eager to avoid acknowledging.
Jeb Bush v. Hillary Clinton the Perfectly Illustrative Election - The Intercept

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

bripat9643 t

Yeah. Who needs compassion? That's just evil because it might just cost you a few cents out of your tax dollars.

"Compassion" is a euphemism for "spend like there's no tomorrow."

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

There you go again... whooo-eee! Who ever said anything about 'immorally'? Whack-a-doodle-doo.

Treat everyone equally? WTF is this France? Fairly? yes. equally? no. Dante has consistently said he agrees with the framers of the US Constitution that popular democracy is an evil

If they obtained their wealth morally, then what entitles anyone to take it? The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it.

Why are you calling me a "shill for the superwealthy" if you believe they deserve to be left alone? The graduated income tax obviously doesn't treat people equally. It treats them differently depending on their income.

Duty, societal obligations? Ayn Rand aside, with freedom comes responsibility. With great wealth comes obligation and as Bill Gates said "great responsibility"

"The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it." Really? Jesus, you're making shit up again: Milton Friedman on the Negative Income Tax Adam Smith Institute

and The Earned Income Tax Credit? It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. It was repealed in 1943. In 1975 President Ford revived it with the urging of free-market economist Milton Friedman.

I never said in any way portrayed by you that the Super Wealthy or anyone else should be 'left alone'

The graduated income tax is a fair tax. Fair for the whole of society, not to particular individuals. Many, many Super Wealthy agree with the graduated tax. It is the retrograde Forbes' of the world and their shills like you that want to make the wealthy pay less. Why?

Why? probably because you are a reactionary who hates other people

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

This is a good summation of the love between America's two ruling families....

Then there are their similar constituencies: what Politico termed “money men” instantly celebrated Jeb Bush’s likely candidacy, while the same publication noted just last month how Wall Street has long been unable to contain its collective glee over a likely Hillary Clinton presidency. The two ruling families have, unsurprisingly, developed a movingly warm relationship befitting their position: the matriarch of the Bush family (former First Lady Barbara) has described the Clinton patriarch (former President Bill) as a virtual family member, noting that her son, George W., affectionately calls his predecessor “my brother by another mother.”

If this happens, the 2016 election would vividly underscore how the American political class functions: by dynasty, plutocracy, fundamental alignment of interests masquerading as deep ideological divisions, and political power translating into vast private wealth and back again. The educative value would be undeniable: somewhat like how the torture report did, it would rub everyone’s noses in exactly those truths they are most eager to avoid acknowledging.
Jeb Bush v. Hillary Clinton the Perfectly Illustrative Election - The Intercept

Parties need money. People need to be active in parties to hold them to account because money cannot buy an election. Just ask that troll Arianna about her and her husband's attempt to buy a Senate seat, and remember Nelson Rockefeller, Romney and other millionaires never getting to but the Oval Office

 

[bripat9643]

bripat9643 t

"Compassion" is a euphemism for "spend like there's no tomorrow."

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

There you go again... whooo-eee! Who ever said anything about 'immorally'? Whack-a-doodle-doo.

Treat everyone equally? WTF is this France? Fairly? yes. equally? no. Dante has consistently said he agrees with the framers of the US Constitution that popular democracy is an evil

If they obtained their wealth morally, then what entitles anyone to take it? The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it.

Why are you calling me a "shill for the superwealthy" if you believe they deserve to be left alone? The graduated income tax obviously doesn't treat people equally. It treats them differently depending on their income.

Duty, societal obligations? Ayn Rand aside, with freedom comes responsibility. With great wealth comes obligation and as Bill Gates said "great responsibility"

You have no logic or facts to support that claim. How does earning money cause you to incur any obligation to society?

"The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it."

Really? Jesus, you're making shit up again: Milton Friedman on the Negative Income Tax Adam Smith Institute

That's an economic argument, not a moral argument. I asked what entitles anyone to take it, not why some economist would think it's better than welfare.

and The Earned Income Tax Credit? It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. It was repealed in 1943. In 1975 President Ford revived it with the urging of free-market economist Milton Friedman.

So?

I never said in any way portrayed by you that the Super Wealthy or anyone else should be 'left alone'

True. You've implied that anyone who maintains they should be left alone is a "shill" for them.

The graduated income tax is a fair tax. Fair for the whole of society, not to particular individuals. Many, many Super Wealthy agree with the graduated tax. It is the retrograde Forbes' of the world and their shills like you that want to make the wealthy pay less. Why?

Why? probably because you are a reactionary who hates other people

See, there you go again - implying that government is entitled to loot the wealthy.

You haven't explained what's "fair" about it. You simply insist that it is.

I don't hate other people unless they prove they are thugs who endorse looting and organized plunder.

You dislike thievery, don't you?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

bripat9643 t

How does it feel being a shill for the Super wealthy? I know it doesn't pay well and they'd never allow you into any of their clubs except through the service entrance -- on your knees

Liberals believe that expecting the government to treat everyone equally makes you a "shill" for the wealthy.

Even if I did believe the wealthy obtained their money immorally, I sure as hell wouldn't want the government to confiscate it. No good ever came from money spent by the government.

There you go again... whooo-eee! Who ever said anything about 'immorally'? Whack-a-doodle-doo.

Treat everyone equally? WTF is this France? Fairly? yes. equally? no. Dante has consistently said he agrees with the framers of the US Constitution that popular democracy is an evil

If they obtained their wealth morally, then what entitles anyone to take it? The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it.

Why are you calling me a "shill for the superwealthy" if you believe they deserve to be left alone? The graduated income tax obviously doesn't treat people equally. It treats them differently depending on their income.

Duty, societal obligations? Ayn Rand aside, with freedom comes responsibility. With great wealth comes obligation and as Bill Gates said "great responsibility"

You have no logic or facts to support that claim. How does earning money cause you to incur any obligation to society?

"The main argument of those who support confiscatory taxation on the wealthy is that they haven't earned it."

Really? Jesus, you're making shit up again: Milton Friedman on the Negative Income Tax Adam Smith Institute

That's an economic argument, not a moral argument. I asked what entitles anyone to take it, not why some economist would think it's better than welfare.

and The Earned Income Tax Credit? It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. It was repealed in 1943. In 1975 President Ford revived it with the urging of free-market economist Milton Friedman.

So?

I never said in any way portrayed by you that the Super Wealthy or anyone else should be 'left alone'

True. You've implied that anyone who maintains they should be left alone is a "shill" for them.

The graduated income tax is a fair tax. Fair for the whole of society, not to particular individuals. Many, many Super Wealthy agree with the graduated tax. It is the retrograde Forbes' of the world and their shills like you that want to make the wealthy pay less. Why?

Why? probably because you are a reactionary who hates other people

See, there you go again - implying that government is entitled to loot the wealthy.

You haven't explained what's "fair" about it. You simply insist that it is.

I don't hate other people unless they prove they are thugs who endorse looting and organized plunder.

You dislike thievery, don't you?

Your argument is not between a shill like you and the likes of me, it is between a poor assed fool and some of the wealthiest people in the history of the USA.

What entitles anyone to take? No anyone takes. The government rightfully and legally taxes.

Unless you are one of the Super Wealthy, you are a shill.

Government is entitled to loot. Government is obligated and granted the power to tax.

Fair is a subjective thing, but many wealthy think the progressive income tax is fair. They argue over capital gains taxes and other taxes, but outside of Elmer G. Forbes, and a few crazed right wing billionaires, most people think alternatives to the progressive income tax are and unfair.

Like left wing progressives you are equating FAIR with EQUAL. Memo to bripat9643 : Life isn't fair.

Thievery is a crime. Taxes are legal. Taxes are not thievery.

 

[gipper]

This is a good summation of the love between America's two ruling families....

Then there are their similar constituencies: what Politico termed “money men” instantly celebrated Jeb Bush’s likely candidacy, while the same publication noted just last month how Wall Street has long been unable to contain its collective glee over a likely Hillary Clinton presidency. The two ruling families have, unsurprisingly, developed a movingly warm relationship befitting their position: the matriarch of the Bush family (former First Lady Barbara) has described the Clinton patriarch (former President Bill) as a virtual family member, noting that her son, George W., affectionately calls his predecessor “my brother by another mother.”

If this happens, the 2016 election would vividly underscore how the American political class functions: by dynasty, plutocracy, fundamental alignment of interests masquerading as deep ideological divisions, and political power translating into vast private wealth and back again. The educative value would be undeniable: somewhat like how the torture report did, it would rub everyone’s noses in exactly those truths they are most eager to avoid acknowledging.
Jeb Bush v. Hillary Clinton the Perfectly Illustrative Election - The Intercept

Parties need money. People need to be active in parties to hold them to account because money cannot buy an election. Just ask that troll Arianna about her and her husband's attempt to buy a Senate seat, and remember Nelson Rockefeller, Romney and other millionaires never getting to but the Oval Office

What we NEED is to eliminate political parties.... But then, I am dreaming.

 

[JoeNormal]

.

He's not 100% pure, which means he's not a conservative and must be attacked with precisely the same ferocity as any liberal.

That appears to be the current rule.

.

That usually only happens after they've been in office and failed.

 

[Toro]

.

He's not 100% pure, which means he's not a conservative and must be attacked with precisely the same ferocity as any liberal.

That appears to be the current rule.

.

That usually only happens after they've been in office and failed.

He's a conservative if he wins the election. He's not if he loses.

 

[elektra]

Jeb Bush, is against Oil, or Jeb Bush is against low gas prices. Jeb Bush took action to raise gas prices. Did everyone enjoy the price of gas for the last 8 years, anybody love the record gas prices under George Bush? What is Jeb Bush's policy on oil? We see his actions. We can not afford another dramatic rise in Energy Prices.

Jeb Bush is not a leader, I do not hear his voice. A leader is known, not an unknown. Where is Jeb on the issues, where are his great inspiring speeches? Where is his greatness? Another Bush is simply another politician waiting to sing whichever way the wind blows.

Another Bush is another Guarantee of more of the same. Big Government, no jobs, no energy, no industry, high housing costs, high food costs.