What the GOP is Offering and Why It Pisses Me Off

[Quantum Windbag]

Two things. 1. it's great having the Windbag on ignore!

Of course it is, because you get to pretend you are smart and not have to deal with the one person on this board who is willing to call you on your stupidity every time he catches you in it.

2. No one has shown a SINGLE thing about the OP that is "utter nonsense". Lots of whining and moaning but not one person has said "You're wrong about the GOP because they do NOT _____" fill in the blank with taxes, Planned Parenthood, gay marriage or whatever. ZERO has been refuted. So you're wrong there. However, since you make the claim, I invite you to do so. And again, my assertation is not that there isn't a shared policy between one Dem and one Repub, it's that they don't make these things their campaign platform, thus defining their priorities. The Dems (for the simple, minded this means the party) do not define fighting gay marriage as one of their key positions.
So I'm happy to debate when someone offers soemthing to debate. Just haven't seen it thusfar.

Actually, I did. As I said in my first response to your nonsense, not handing out corporate welfare is not the same as wanting to eliminate Planned Parenthood. I also dealt with most of the absurdities you spouted in the same way, just like I dismissed your absurd claim that Obama is getting us out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

You don't actually want a debate, your actions prove it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I really thought the party would change after Obama got elected. And it did. It got worse. Where's the candidate who says things like:
1. Any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive. So I'm ending the subsidies to Big Oil, farms, alternative energy companies etc...

So... you agree with Romney in that the US automakers should not have been bailed out.

2. Less government is better. So I don't CARE if a couple gals get married. Seriously, we have more important things to worry about.

So... you disagree wit The Obama in that marriage is, and should be, a union of a man and a woman.

3. We have a serious deficit problem. So instead of some bs plan that will have zero effect and appeal to the emotions of a few, I'm cutting defense by 50%. That will save us a TRILLION dollars every three years.

And do nothing to entitlement spending, which exceeds defense spending by 350%, the growth of which outpacres that of defense by leaps and bounds?
What do you hope to accomplish by putting your finger in the dike?

4. I'm getting rid of the tax breaks associated with shipping jobs overseas.

Which are what, exactly, and were put in place exactly when?

We have a huge consumer base, a safe country and a great infrastructure so it's not like companies are just going to leave, it we stop rewarding them for screwing the American worker.

Like it or not, The American Worker competes in a global labor market.
As soon as the unions figure this, get rid of the idea that they are entitled to dictate wages/benefits for their members and act in a manner that allows the American worker to compete in that market, the jobs will stop going overseas.

Liberals may now discuss the points and ConservaRepubs may now ignore them, change the subject, sling some labels and the usual...

I look forward to your response.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

 

[MeBelle]

Hey, how about a link to read that backs up your OP?

You need a LINK???? Because it's such a big mystery to you that the GOP is against gay marriage? LOL! Seriously? Here's 30 seconds worth of search on FOX:

Several States Take Up Fight Over Defunding Planned Parenthood | Fox News

GOP budget plan aims to head off Pentagon cuts with social program savings | Fox News

Ryan budget revives fight on Dodd-Frank, carried interest - The Deal Pipeline(SAMPLE CONTENT: NEED AN ID?)

I mean seriously? Which stated position in the OP isn't common knowledge? But I love that all the ConservaRepubs who have posted thusfar, have proven me absolutely correct! Issues? Nah. ConservaRepubs don't discuss those. LibDems do but not ConservaRepubs.

First, no reason to be a jerk to me.
Second, you threw A LOT of items into your OP.
Third, asking for links to back up all your claims so a person can read where you're coming from...how is that proof that people don't want to discuss?

If you assert, you must provide...does that ring a bell at all?

I disagree. It rains. Do you need a link to believe that? The GOP wants to lower taxes. Do you need a link to believe that? Some things are common knowledge. You're on a political chat board. It is assumed you would have at least a modicum of knowledge concerning American politics.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ing-and-why-it-pisses-me-off.html#post5241126


Disagree all you want.
Obviously others are finding your OP difficult...which is one of the reasons I asked for links.

Disengaged now, thanks!

 

[IndependntLogic]

I really thought the party would change after Obama got elected. And it did. It got worse. Where's the candidate who says things like:
1. Any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive. So I'm ending the subsidies to Big Oil, farms, alternative energy companies etc...

So... you agree with Romney in that the US automakers should not have been bailed out.

Actually, I would have bailed out the Auto Industry on the condition that they be broken up, thus eliminating the Too Big To Fail factor. So I disagree with Romney there but I am not in agreement with how Bush and Obama did it. I would not have bailed out the banks. Historically, when the US has bailed out manufacturers, we have not only gotten the money back but earned dividends in a big way. Historically, when we have bailed out financial institutions, the taxpayers ends up screwed.
So I have answered this question directly with my reasons why. I have yet to see this kind of reply from a single ConaservaRepub in this thread. Apparently, claiming the GOP is not pro-marriage, is "hyperbole" and therefore impossible to address...

2. Less government is better. So I don't CARE if a couple gals get married. Seriously, we have more important things to worry about.

So... you disagree wit The Obama in that marriage is, and should be, a union of a man and a woman.

Yes! I absolutely disagree with Obama on that issue. Is my answer clear and direct enough? However, Obama does not follow the Dem Party line in all ways - which I'm fine with as neither do I.


And do nothing to entitlement spending, which exceeds defense spending by 350%, the growth of which outpacres that of defense by leaps and bounds?
What do you hope to accomplish by putting your finger in the dike?

The specific entitlement spending the GOP addresses does nothing either. Zero. I mean, if you find a really loyal GOP accountant, they will say that in 99 years or whatever, it will go down under the Ryan plan but even that is complete bullsht as Ryan claims he will cut tax loopholes but as usual with todays' GOP, won't specify which. So it's Zero. Defense is an area that we definitely CAN cut without a single American suffering as a result. The other areas are going to be trickier but yes, there is a LOT of entitlement spending I would cut. We have people who are 4th generation welfare. WTF???? I can't believe that no one in four generations is able to work. I would eliminate the tax deductions to charities for the arts and the NEA altogether. There are a lot of areas I would cut but SSI and Medicare would not be among them.
But again, instead of directly any issue in my OP the way I have, your tactic epitomizes the GOP: Just redirect, change the subject etc...

Which are what, exactly, and were put in place exactly when?

There are lots of them and they've been around for decades. One of the worst was written so that when a company moved from say, Iowa to Indiana, they could deduct the cost training people for the move, accerlate the depreciation of local assets (because if it was a factory or something, they would be hard to move) etc... I didn't say the GOP is responsible for their existence but when Obama and the Dems brought up closing these loopholes, the GOP immediately became big fans of fair trade and the global marketplace. Screw free trade and the global market place when it comes to rewarding global companies for shipping our jobs overseas.

We have a huge consumer base, a safe country and a great infrastructure so it's not like companies are just going to leave, it we stop rewarding them for screwing the American worker.

Like it or not, The American Worker competes in a global labor market.
As soon as the unions figure this, get rid of the idea that they are entitled to dictate wages/benefits for their members and act in a manner that allows the American worker to compete in that market, the jobs will stop going overseas.

Of course it's all the unions fault .Riiiight. Guess what? I have long held that it is definitely PARTLY the unions fault. At least unions like the UAW, Teamsters and Longshoremen. But if competing the global marketplace means an average income of $3 a day, um yeah. Not the country I want to live in tyvm. There are a lot of factors that contribute to jobs going overseas and guess what? SOME of them (like the tax breaks mentioned) are GOP backed.

Liberals may now discuss the points and ConservaRepubs may now ignore them, change the subject, sling some labels and the usual...

I look forward to your response.

So now you have it. What will be interesting is, I look forward to you now addressing the issues in the OP as directly as I have. I don't expect it but it would be a refreshing change.

 

[blackhawk]

There is a LOT I think the Dems have done poorly. ObamaCare is a prime example. But overall and for this election, I find the Dems positions, actions etc.... MUCH better than the Repubs during the last couple of years and currently.

So, want to be specific? As you notice, I do not insult (unless insulted first) and although I may challenge them, I can respect differing views.

During the Bush years you had out of control government spending from the moment Obama and the Democrats were sworn in the out of control government spending continued there is very little foreign policy difference between Bush and Obama there are differences on social issues between Democrats and Republicans and there always will be that is nothing new.But when you at the policies and results from Bush and the Republicans to Obama and the Democrats there is really no difference between them.

This is actually a very solid and well-reasoned post. I would still respectfully disagree. Specifically, Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanstan and Obama is getting us out of both. Bush did nothing but piss off the entire world by saying "Hey everyone, waddya think? Is it cool to invade Iraq?" And after they all said No, he said "well fuck you anyway!" and got us mired into a shit storm for years, bankrupting us in the process. Obama got us in and out of libya with full NATO support, little cost and zero lives. And an EXIT Strategy! Wow! The GOP fights to increase the defense budget while Obama wants to slash it.
So I see significant differences in foreign policy, defense budget etc...

Your part right Yes Bush made the choice to go into Iraq and that is on him the invasion of Afghanistan however was because of the 9-11 attacks do you really think any President would not have done the same after that? No Obama did not get us out of both either the agreement to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq was negotiated in October 2008 and signed in November of 2008 I believe there were negotiations between Obama and the Iraqi Government to extend that agreement but the Iraqi government wanted a provision that if American troops were accused of crimes in Iraq they would tried in Iraq the U.S. would not agree to that and prime minister Al Maliki then decided not to extend the agreement. As for Afghanistan time will tell how that works out as for Libya a tin horn dictator with a military that was not capable of anything other than putting down internal revolts was removed and we still have no idea what will take his place there. A bit of a sidebar here the situation in Syria is very similar to Libya yet no one including the U.S wants to get involved there in any way with airstrikes or a no fly zone. Any cuts to the defense budget will be the result of the failure of the so called super committee to reach a agreement not because Obama wants to do it for the record I really doubt any of those triggers will go into effect.

 

[IndependntLogic]

During the Bush years you had out of control government spending from the moment Obama and the Democrats were sworn in the out of control government spending continued there is very little foreign policy difference between Bush and Obama there are differences on social issues between Democrats and Republicans and there always will be that is nothing new.But when you at the policies and results from Bush and the Republicans to Obama and the Democrats there is really no difference between them.

This is actually a very solid and well-reasoned post. I would still respectfully disagree. Specifically, Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanstan and Obama is getting us out of both. Bush did nothing but piss off the entire world by saying "Hey everyone, waddya think? Is it cool to invade Iraq?" And after they all said No, he said "well fuck you anyway!" and got us mired into a shit storm for years, bankrupting us in the process. Obama got us in and out of libya with full NATO support, little cost and zero lives. And an EXIT Strategy! Wow! The GOP fights to increase the defense budget while Obama wants to slash it.
So I see significant differences in foreign policy, defense budget etc...

Your part right Yes Bush made the choice to go into Iraq and that is on him the invasion of Afghanistan however was because of the 9-11 attacks do you really think any President would not have done the same after that? No Obama did not get us out of both either the agreement to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq was negotiated in October 2008 and signed in November of 2008 I believe there were negotiations between Obama and the Iraqi Government to extend that agreement but the Iraqi government wanted a provision that if American troops were accused of crimes in Iraq they would tried in Iraq the U.S. would not agree to that and prime minister Al Maliki then decided not to extend the agreement.
I agree but he COULD have broken his promises, put our troops in jeopardy for no reason othe than politics etc... like Bush did.

As for Afghanistan time will tell how that works out
I was NIS. Connect the dots. Lots of ops in Afghanistan when Obama says OBL IS important. Leads to Pakistan. Then for the first time in US History, we publicly ransom a spy out of Islamibabd for $2M (remember the former Blackwater / NIS guy who shot a couple people?). Why? Obviously he knew something pretty important. 3 months later we take out OBL in Pakistan. Good job Mr. Prez. Now get us TF outta there.

as for Libya a tin horn dictator with a military that was not capable of anything other than putting down internal revolts was removed and we still have no idea what will take his place there. A bit of a sidebar here the situation in Syria is very similar to Libya yet no one including the U.S wants to get involved there in any way with airstrikes or a no fly zone.
With Libya we had a guy the whole world hated and full support of NATO and 90%+ of the population. In Syria we have a very different situation. At least 30 - 40% of the population supports Assad. We don't have the access routes. NATO is not enthused about it. I personally could live happy with us never getting in another clusterflick in the ME.

Any cuts to the defense budget will be the result of the failure of the so called super committee to reach a agreement not because Obama wants to do it for the record I really doubt any of those triggers will go into effect.

The difference being there is not one Republican saying they WANT to cut defense. Hell, the Ryan budget increases it. However Obama and the Dems have realized that if we shift our focus to intel, SOF's and technology, we can cut a ton. We have a new kind of enemy and the only upside to land wars belongs to the Military Industrial Complex. And Xi, of course....

 

[WillowTree]

This is actually a very solid and well-reasoned post. I would still respectfully disagree. Specifically, Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanstan and Obama is getting us out of both. Bush did nothing but piss off the entire world by saying "Hey everyone, waddya think? Is it cool to invade Iraq?" And after they all said No, he said "well fuck you anyway!" and got us mired into a shit storm for years, bankrupting us in the process. Obama got us in and out of libya with full NATO support, little cost and zero lives. And an EXIT Strategy! Wow! The GOP fights to increase the defense budget while Obama wants to slash it.
So I see significant differences in foreign policy, defense budget etc...

Your part right Yes Bush made the choice to go into Iraq and that is on him the invasion of Afghanistan however was because of the 9-11 attacks do you really think any President would not have done the same after that? No Obama did not get us out of both either the agreement to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq was negotiated in October 2008 and signed in November of 2008 I believe there were negotiations between Obama and the Iraqi Government to extend that agreement but the Iraqi government wanted a provision that if American troops were accused of crimes in Iraq they would tried in Iraq the U.S. would not agree to that and prime minister Al Maliki then decided not to extend the agreement.
I agree but he COULD have broken his promises, put our troops in jeopardy for no reason othe than politics etc... like Bush did.

As for Afghanistan time will tell how that works out
I was NIS. Connect the dots. Lots of ops in Afghanistan when Obama says OBL IS important. Leads to Pakistan. Then for the first time in US History, we publicly ransom a spy out of Islamibabd for $2M (remember the former Blackwater / NIS guy who shot a couple people?). Why? Obviously he knew something pretty important. 3 months later we take out OBL in Pakistan. Good job Mr. Prez. Now get us TF outta there.

as for Libya a tin horn dictator with a military that was not capable of anything other than putting down internal revolts was removed and we still have no idea what will take his place there. A bit of a sidebar here the situation in Syria is very similar to Libya yet no one including the U.S wants to get involved there in any way with airstrikes or a no fly zone.
With Libya we had a guy the whole world hated and full support of NATO and 90%+ of the population. In Syria we have a very different situation. At least 30 - 40% of the population supports Assad. We don't have the access routes. NATO is not enthused about it. I personally could live happy with us never getting in another clusterflick in the ME.

Any cuts to the defense budget will be the result of the failure of the so called super committee to reach a agreement not because Obama wants to do it for the record I really doubt any of those triggers will go into effect.

The difference being there is not one Republican saying they WANT to cut defense. Hell, the Ryan budget increases it. However Obama and the Dems have realized that if we shift our focus to intel, SOF's and technology, we can cut a ton. We have a new kind of enemy and the only upside to land wars belongs to the Military Industrial Complex. And Xi, of course....

Are you still in here acting the pompous fool? care for a crayfish?

 

[rdean]

Republicans are offering ignorance and slavery. It's what they know. They believe these two things keep them "safe".

 

[blackhawk]

I was NIS. Connect the dots. Lots of ops in Afghanistan when Obama says OBL IS important. Leads to Pakistan. Then for the first time in US History, we publicly ransom a spy out of Islamibabd for $2M (remember the former Blackwater / NIS guy who shot a couple people?). Why? Obviously he knew something pretty important. 3 months later we take out OBL in Pakistan. Good job Mr. Prez. Now get us TF outta there.
Short sighted thinking in my opinion while taking out Bin laden is good no question the war revolves around more than just him if we do complete withdraw from Afghanistan or a drastic reduction in forces I truly believe Al-Queda and the Taliban will take control of the country or at least a good part of it and set up shop again and in a few years we will be right back where we were before 9-11. The one thing Al-Queda has proven over the years is if we ignore them they will regroup and come back I fear that is exactly what we are about to do underestimating enemies is something we have become increasingly good at.

 

[Annie]

What the GOP seems to claim as their solutions to our are as follows:

A budget that doesn't reduce the deficit (at least, according to non-GOP sources) and increases defense spending. They will not even discuss our defense spending. As if our military is so bad at our jobs, they have to spend 10x more than any other country to compensate for it.

The promise that they will protect the Rich and also Powerful Global Corporations. Because you know, that's who really needs protecting. Seriously, only Americans are stupid enough to buy that one.

They'll create jobs by lowering the corporate tax rates. Because Zero is too much. And the reason companies ship jobs from the USA - where they pay 17% of average - to India - where the rate is 33%, has to do with taxes. It's not that India has an average income of $2 a day, no labor or environmental laws to speak of etc... No. It's that attractive 33% tax rate that has Raja answering the phone whenever I call tech support. Riiight. Oh, and they've made it clear they'll fight the Dems on closing the loopholes that make it advantageous to ship our jobs overseas. Because if we protect our jobs here, all the companies in the world will leave the largest consumer base they have. Riiiight.

The promise they will fight Dodd-Frank and make sure the banks that took us in the toilet, remain Too Big To Fail.

They'll get rid of the mortgage deduction for the Middle Class (at least according to Boehner and Cantor, this would be a good thing). That way, the only way it's worth buying a house, is if you're a corporation. Then, once the corporations own the entire country, they can raise the rents. Peachy.

They will get rid of planned parenthood and increase the number of welfare moms. Wonderful.

They will make sure we don't have any more of those terrible regulations that hurt business. You know, like upgrading equipment used in The Gulf on oil rigs. Or making sure that CitiBank doesn't have to worry about getting in trouble when they commit fraud. Or BofA can go ahead and illegally foreclose on our troops while their overseas.

They'll protect me from two women getting married in Iowa. Because that's um, scary. Maybe Marcus Bachmann can pray the gayness out of them for me. Really, how the hell did this become so important?

They'll attack Iran. Whose military hasn't been reduced to zero through years of sanctions like Iraq was. Whose military is ten times bigger and better equipped than any military in the region. Because what we really need is another war in the Middle East - while lowering taxes - because that worked out so well for us last time.

WTF people? Obama sure hasn't been great but the GOP has tried SO HARD to make him / the Dems look good by comparison, it's a no-brainer.

I really thought the party would change after Obama got elected. And it did. It got worse. Where's the candidate who says things like:
1. Any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive. So I'm ending the subsidies to Big Oil, farms, alternative energy companies etc...
2. Less government is better. So I don't CARE if a couple gals get married. Seriously, we have more important things to worry about.
3. We have a serious deficit problem. So instead of some bs plan that will have zero effect and appeal to the emotions of a few, I'm cutting defense by 50%. That will save us a TRILLION dollars every three years.
4. I'm getting rid of the tax breaks associated with shipping jobs overseas. We have a huge consumer base, a safe country and a great infrastructure so it's not like companies are just going to leave, it we stop rewarding them for screwing the American worker. I'll reverse the breaks as incentives for brining jobs back where they belong.

You know, stuff like that. Instead, i get the promise they'll defund planned parenthood, thus reducing the budget by 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001%
Wonderful.

Liberals may now discuss the points and ConservaRepubs may now ignore them, change the subject, sling some labels and the usual...

they are offering a budget? Did you ask what it looked like?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Your part right Yes Bush made the choice to go into Iraq and that is on him the invasion of Afghanistan however was because of the 9-11 attacks do you really think any President would not have done the same after that? No Obama did not get us out of both either the agreement to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq was negotiated in October 2008 and signed in November of 2008 I believe there were negotiations between Obama and the Iraqi Government to extend that agreement but the Iraqi government wanted a provision that if American troops were accused of crimes in Iraq they would tried in Iraq the U.S. would not agree to that and prime minister Al Maliki then decided not to extend the agreement.
I agree but he COULD have broken his promises, put our troops in jeopardy for no reason othe than politics etc... like Bush did.

As for Afghanistan time will tell how that works out
I was NIS. Connect the dots. Lots of ops in Afghanistan when Obama says OBL IS important. Leads to Pakistan. Then for the first time in US History, we publicly ransom a spy out of Islamibabd for $2M (remember the former Blackwater / NIS guy who shot a couple people?). Why? Obviously he knew something pretty important. 3 months later we take out OBL in Pakistan. Good job Mr. Prez. Now get us TF outta there.

as for Libya a tin horn dictator with a military that was not capable of anything other than putting down internal revolts was removed and we still have no idea what will take his place there. A bit of a sidebar here the situation in Syria is very similar to Libya yet no one including the U.S wants to get involved there in any way with airstrikes or a no fly zone.
With Libya we had a guy the whole world hated and full support of NATO and 90%+ of the population. In Syria we have a very different situation. At least 30 - 40% of the population supports Assad. We don't have the access routes. NATO is not enthused about it. I personally could live happy with us never getting in another clusterflick in the ME.

Any cuts to the defense budget will be the result of the failure of the so called super committee to reach a agreement not because Obama wants to do it for the record I really doubt any of those triggers will go into effect.

The difference being there is not one Republican saying they WANT to cut defense. Hell, the Ryan budget increases it. However Obama and the Dems have realized that if we shift our focus to intel, SOF's and technology, we can cut a ton. We have a new kind of enemy and the only upside to land wars belongs to the Military Industrial Complex. And Xi, of course....

Are you still in here acting the pompous fool? care for a crayfish?

Hmmm. Zero. Zero on a single issue. But a petty insult. This is a political discussion board. If you would like to try discussing politics sometime, I invite you to give it a try. If you can do so without slinging petty insults, I will be happy to consider anything you have to say - and without insult. I will also directly address anything you discuss and can offer respect for any well-reasoned or at least reasonable post.
Or you can get whatever gratification you realize from saying nothing and inulting strangers on the internet. We all decide who we are, don't we? Whatever floats your boat.

I was NIS. Connect the dots. Lots of ops in Afghanistan when Obama says OBL IS important. Leads to Pakistan. Then for the first time in US History, we publicly ransom a spy out of Islamibabd for $2M (remember the former Blackwater / NIS guy who shot a couple people?). Why? Obviously he knew something pretty important. 3 months later we take out OBL in Pakistan. Good job Mr. Prez. Now get us TF outta there.
Short sighted thinking in my opinion while taking out Bin laden is good no question the war revolves around more than just him if we do complete withdraw from Afghanistan or a drastic reduction in forces I truly believe Al-Queda and the Taliban will take control of the country or at least a good part of it and set up shop again and in a few years we will be right back where we were before 9-11. The one thing Al-Queda has proven over the years is if we ignore them they will regroup and come back I fear that is exactly what we are about to do underestimating enemies is something we have become increasingly good at.

I understand why you feel that way but disagree. What are we supposed to do? Stay there forever? Our job isn't to stabilize other countries but to protect our own. For the hundreds of billions we spend wasting our time in countries that will never, ever appreciate what we do for them, we could spend the money more wisely imo improving our defense at home, bolstering our intel, focusing on technology and expanding and specializing our SOFs.

 

[zonly1]

[The only ones who seem to be concerned with what has happened to the Republican party are left wing Democrats. The Republican party has moved slightly to the right, but the Democrat party has moved so far to the left, that the gap has widened significantly.

Having read hundreds of posts from all you outspoken liberals, one thing is very clear. Either you don't have any real concept of what Republicans propose, or you are so partisan that you don't even want to know.

I am a Republican by default. It is not my ideal of a party, but it is a hell of a lot closer to it than the Democrat party.

Please tell us everything the Democratic party has moved so far to the left on.

that would be universal health care or obumercare won't increase the debt

 

[editec]

Great rant, Indie.

Very amusing example of gallows humor.

 

[zonly1]

You need a LINK???? Because it's such a big mystery to you that the GOP is against gay marriage? LOL! Seriously? Here's 30 seconds worth of search on FOX:

Several States Take Up Fight Over Defunding Planned Parenthood | Fox News

GOP budget plan aims to head off Pentagon cuts with social program savings | Fox News

Ryan budget revives fight on Dodd-Frank, carried interest - The Deal Pipeline(SAMPLE CONTENT: NEED AN ID?)

I mean seriously? Which stated position in the OP isn't common knowledge? But I love that all the ConservaRepubs who have posted thusfar, have proven me absolutely correct! Issues? Nah. ConservaRepubs don't discuss those. LibDems do but not ConservaRepubs.

why is gay marriage such a high priority with you libnutters when we have financial issues, a virtual domino effect?

You miss my point. It's that gay marriage ISN'T a big deal to LibDems and Indies. We don't CARE if gays get married. It doesn't affect us. Now, how many candidates in the GOP Primaries went out of their way to say they would support DOMA? All of them. How many times have GOPers gone out of their way to bring this up? Tons. Why? Your point is mine. We have bigger fish to fry.

maybe you can answer this, why is george soros shorting the dollar?
why are gold and silver prices artificially control below value?

I disagree. It rains. Do you need a link to believe that? The GOP wants to lower taxes. Do you need a link to believe that? Some things are common knowledge. You're on a political chat board. It is assumed you would have at least a modicum of knowledge concerning American politics.

hey dumbass why is it a great idea to remove/cut down/shrink the pruchasing power of Americans? you have plan against the evil capitialist that you seem to partake in on a daily bases????

1. How has the Dem party moved "wildly to the left"? Specific examples would be great. 2. How is anything in the OP inaccurate. I've seen a ton of posts from the ConservaRepubs in this thread that say exactly that - but NONE of them point out a single inaccuracy. The Right are all saying "You're wrong in lots of way, none of which I can point out!" That's pretty weak.

Left and being radical is there place plus kaos. obumer and kaos are lovers or are you too obtuse and blind. i'm only answering your worn out questions.

Two things. 1. it's great having the Windbag on ignore!
2. No one has shown a SINGLE thing about the OP that is "utter nonsense". Lots of whining and moaning but not one person has said "You're wrong about the GOP because they do NOT _____" fill in the blank with taxes, Planned Parenthood, gay marriage or whatever. ZERO has been refuted. So you're wrong there. However, since you make the claim, I invite you to do so. And again, my assertation is not that there isn't a shared policy between one Dem and one Repub, it's that they don't make these things their campaign platform, thus defining their priorities. The Dems (for the simple, minded this means the party) do not define fighting gay marriage as one of their key positions.
So I'm happy to debate when someone offers soemthing to debate. Just haven't seen it thusfar.

seems like you like to talk to the mirror before your convince that is the answer when keynesian econ has never worked


To whom has Obama given our riches? Although i disagree with his oil policy, he hasn't given it away. How has he impinged on your right to defend yourself? I still have my gun. All the hysterics about 2nd amendment and the Dems have never even introduced a single law in his term. So no, none of what you claim is true as far as i know. But if you can support any of it, I'm all ears. This would be the difference between what I assert and the counters from The Right. Attention Right: I CAN SUPPORT EVERYTHING IN THE OP WITH DIRECT QUOTES FROM GOP LEADERS. (see a few examples below)
to pay off his union buds..what planet are you on idiot? you forget the stimulus but of course like pavlov's dog you'll bark like an idiot an blame someone else

You need a LINK???? Because it's such a big mystery to you that the GOP is against gay marriage?

you're play book isn't working neither is your broken crystal ball. i suggest you get into another line of work...opps there are no jobs
You've just provided a perfect example of what I was talking about. You conveniently overlook that President Obama is against gay marriage too. In fact, his and Romney's position are identical. You really need to put some focus and specificity to your posts if you really want debate. Now, if you're just trolling liberal talking points, well...

what planet are you on?
Show me where Obama is campaigning on this being a priority? Would you like to see quotes from Mitt, Newt, Ricky and Michele Whackjob claiming they will make DOMA a priority? Again, it's not JUST the issues, it's the priorities.
Thusfar, the Right has not come up with a single counter to anything in the OP. The very best they have been able to say is "Well oh yeah? Well the Dems don't make anything in the OP or even hold these positions as a party platform BUT one democrat currently has the same position as one other Repub in one area. Well um, wow.

The OP holds. The ConservaRepubs have yet to offer a single counter. Thus the reason Obama will win in November. But take heart ConservaRepubs. Read my signature below. (because you know, all Liberals predict the GOP will have victories in the house and senate! )

yep delussions of grandeur...with almost certainty

 

[zonly1]

Hey, how about a link to read that backs up your OP?

You need a LINK???? Because it's such a big mystery to you that the GOP is against gay marriage? LOL! Seriously? Here's 30 seconds worth of search on FOX:

Several States Take Up Fight Over Defunding Planned Parenthood | Fox News

GOP budget plan aims to head off Pentagon cuts with social program savings | Fox News

Ryan budget revives fight on Dodd-Frank, carried interest - The Deal Pipeline(SAMPLE CONTENT: NEED AN ID?)

I mean seriously? Which stated position in the OP isn't common knowledge? But I love that all the ConservaRepubs who have posted thusfar, have proven me absolutely correct! Issues? Nah. ConservaRepubs don't discuss those. LibDems do but not ConservaRepubs.

why is gay marriage such a high priority with you libnutters when we have financial issues, a virtual domino effect?

maybe you can answer this, why is george soros shorting the dollar?
why are gold and silver prices artificially control below value?

bump for illogical

 

[M14 Shooter]

I really thought the party would change after Obama got elected. And it did. It got worse. Where's the candidate who says things like:
1. Any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive. So I'm ending the subsidies to Big Oil, farms, alternative energy companies etc...

So... you agree with Romney in that the US automakers should not have been bailed out.

2. Less government is better. So I don't CARE if a couple gals get married. Seriously, we have more important things to worry about.

So... you disagree wit The Obama in that marriage is, and should be, a union of a man and a woman.


And do nothing to entitlement spending, which exceeds defense spending by 350%, the growth of which outpacres that of defense by leaps and bounds?
What do you hope to accomplish by putting your finger in the dike?


Which are what, exactly, and were put in place exactly when?

We have a huge consumer base, a safe country and a great infrastructure so it's not like companies are just going to leave, it we stop rewarding them for screwing the American worker.

Like it or not, The American Worker competes in a global labor market.
As soon as the unions figure this, get rid of the idea that they are entitled to dictate wages/benefits for their members and act in a manner that allows the American worker to compete in that market, the jobs will stop going overseas.

Liberals may now discuss the points and ConservaRepubs may now ignore them, change the subject, sling some labels and the usual...

I look forward to your response.

Still looking forward to a response.

 

[IndependntLogic]

why is gay marriage such a high priority with you libnutters when we have financial issues, a virtual domino effect?

You miss my point. It's that gay marriage ISN'T a big deal to LibDems and Indies. We don't CARE if gays get married. It doesn't affect us. Now, how many candidates in the GOP Primaries went out of their way to say they would support DOMA? All of them. How many times have GOPers gone out of their way to bring this up? Tons. Why? Your point is mine. We have bigger fish to fry.

maybe you can answer this, why is george soros shorting the dollar?
why are gold and silver prices artificially control below value?

I disagree. It rains. Do you need a link to believe that? The GOP wants to lower taxes. Do you need a link to believe that? Some things are common knowledge. You're on a political chat board. It is assumed you would have at least a modicum of knowledge concerning American politics.

hey dumbass why is it a great idea to remove/cut down/shrink the pruchasing power of Americans? you have plan against the evil capitialist that you seem to partake in on a daily bases????

Hmmm. petty insults but Zero of substance or specific. Also, you make a rather ignorant assumption about me and capitalism. I'm all for it. Kinda hard for me not to be as I own a business, employ people etc... So when you have nothing to say, your tactic is to simply label others based on ignorance. Well this is not unusual but hardly impressive either. Also, why the big size? Compensating? Jus sayin'

1. How has the Dem party moved "wildly to the left"? Specific examples would be great. 2. How is anything in the OP inaccurate. I've seen a ton of posts from the ConservaRepubs in this thread that say exactly that - but NONE of them point out a single inaccuracy. The Right are all saying "You're wrong in lots of way, none of which I can point out!" That's pretty weak.

Left and being radical is there place plus kaos. obumer and kaos are lovers or are you too obtuse and blind. i'm only answering your worn out questions.

I believe you meant "their" and "chaos" above. Perhaps you could find a nice Liberal elitist to help you learn the language we speak! I'd be happy to refer you to someone with a nice ivy league degree, if you like. So still Zero to say. Not surprising.

Two things. 1. it's great having the Windbag on ignore!
2. No one has shown a SINGLE thing about the OP that is "utter nonsense". Lots of whining and moaning but not one person has said "You're wrong about the GOP because they do NOT _____" fill in the blank with taxes, Planned Parenthood, gay marriage or whatever. ZERO has been refuted. So you're wrong there. However, since you make the claim, I invite you to do so. And again, my assertation is not that there isn't a shared policy between one Dem and one Repub, it's that they don't make these things their campaign platform, thus defining their priorities. The Dems (for the simple, minded this means the party) do not define fighting gay marriage as one of their key positions.
So I'm happy to debate when someone offers soemthing to debate. Just haven't seen it thusfar.

seems like you like to talk to the mirror before your convince that is the answer when keynesian econ has never worked

Still absolutely Zero on issues or of substance. A rather evident pattern developing here.

To whom has Obama given our riches? Although i disagree with his oil policy, he hasn't given it away. How has he impinged on your right to defend yourself? I still have my gun. All the hysterics about 2nd amendment and the Dems have never even introduced a single law in his term. So no, none of what you claim is true as far as i know. But if you can support any of it, I'm all ears. This would be the difference between what I assert and the counters from The Right. Attention Right: I CAN SUPPORT EVERYTHING IN THE OP WITH DIRECT QUOTES FROM GOP LEADERS. (see a few examples below)
to pay off his union buds..what planet are you on idiot? you forget the stimulus but of course like pavlov's dog you'll bark like an idiot an blame someone else

Hmmm. More petty insults and FINALLY you actually claim something: That Obama has given unions our money. This is a lie. If you believe it, you have been deceived. Obama has not given a penny to any unions. I invite you to prove otherwise. So you're still at Zero.

you're play book isn't working neither is your broken crystal ball. i suggest you get into another line of work...opps there are no jobs

Hmmm. Another rant with Zero in it. Oops. Except you're wrong as not only do I have a job, unlike you, I'm the guy providing them for other Americans. Perhaps if you tried discussing facts, issues etc... you wouldn't look so foolish. Just a friendly suggestion! Pattern remains at Zero. Zero facts. Zero Substance. Like your Party.

You've just provided a perfect example of what I was talking about. You conveniently overlook that President Obama is against gay marriage too. In fact, his and Romney's position are identical. You really need to put some focus and specificity to your posts if you really want debate. Now, if you're just trolling liberal talking points, well...

what planet are you on?

Well, I would on the planet with verifiable facts. You're still holding solid at Zero.

Show me where Obama is campaigning on this being a priority? Would you like to see quotes from Mitt, Newt, Ricky and Michele Whackjob claiming they will make DOMA a priority? Again, it's not JUST the issues, it's the priorities.
Thusfar, the Right has not come up with a single counter to anything in the OP. The very best they have been able to say is "Well oh yeah? Well the Dems don't make anything in the OP or even hold these positions as a party platform BUT one democrat currently has the same position as one other Repub in one area. Well um, wow.

The OP holds. The ConservaRepubs have yet to offer a single counter. Thus the reason Obama will win in November. But take heart ConservaRepubs. Read my signature below. (because you know, all Liberals predict the GOP will have victories in the house and senate! )

yep delussions of grandeur...with almost certainty

So you're an agnry little guy and prone to hysterics. Okay. You're great with slinging your cute little insults but if you're goal is to show that the GOP has anything of substance to offer, you fail rather miserably.

Perhaps the OP was a bit overwhelming for you - and several others. So let's offer an opportunity to pick just one of the issues I find swaying me to the Dem side.
How about the GOP battle against Dodd-Frank and the fact that they don't want anything put in place to replace. Now this may be a bit much to ask of Zonly as he has yet to address a single issue but if there are other ConservaRepubs who would care to take a crack at it, feel free to ring in. Cheers!

 

[IndependntLogic]

I really thought the party would change after Obama got elected. And it did. It got worse. Where's the candidate who says things like:
1. Any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive. So I'm ending the subsidies to Big Oil, farms, alternative energy companies etc...

So... you agree with Romney in that the US automakers should not have been bailed out.


So... you disagree wit The Obama in that marriage is, and should be, a union of a man and a woman.


And do nothing to entitlement spending, which exceeds defense spending by 350%, the growth of which outpacres that of defense by leaps and bounds?
What do you hope to accomplish by putting your finger in the dike?


Which are what, exactly, and were put in place exactly when?


Like it or not, The American Worker competes in a global labor market.
As soon as the unions figure this, get rid of the idea that they are entitled to dictate wages/benefits for their members and act in a manner that allows the American worker to compete in that market, the jobs will stop going overseas.

Liberals may now discuss the points and ConservaRepubs may now ignore them, change the subject, sling some labels and the usual...

I look forward to your response.

Still looking forward to a response.

Already happened in post #65. All direct answers to eerything you asked along with the reasons why I feel that way.
Oh, and an invitation for you to do the same.
Funny that. I've been waiting for your response.
Obviously you just scrolled past or missed it.

Still looking forward to a response.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So... you agree with Romney in that the US automakers should not have been bailed out.

Actually, I would have bailed out the Auto Industry on the condition that they be broken up, thus eliminating the Too Big To Fail factor.

I guess you're not all that steadfast in your belief that any business that can't survive without government help, shouldn't survive.
On what basis do you pick and choose the application of your beliefs?

So... you disagree wit The Obama in that marriage is, and should be, a union of a man and a woman.

Yes! I absolutely disagree with Obama on that issue. Is my answer clear and direct enough? However, Obama does not follow the Dem Party line in all ways - which I'm fine with as neither do I.

It appears that The Obama has changed his mind on this issue, floppimng from one side to the other.
What do you think about politicians that flop their positions based on public sentiment?

And do nothing to entitlement spending, which exceeds defense spending by 350%, the growth of which outpacres that of defense by leaps and bounds?
What do you hope to accomplish by putting your finger in the dike?

The specific entitlement spending the GOP addresses does nothing either.

You neither answered the question, nor addressed the issue it represents.

Which are what, exactly, and were put in place exactly when?

There are lots of them and they've been around for decades.

This does not supply the specifics I asked for, especially in regards to the tax breaks for sending sending jobs overseas.
Please do try again.

ike it or not, The American Worker competes in a global labor market.
As soon as the unions figure this, get rid of the idea that they are entitled to dictate wages/benefits for their members and act in a manner that allows the American worker to compete in that market, the jobs will stop going overseas.

Of course it's all the unions fault .Riiiight. Guess what? I have long held that it is definitely PARTLY the unions fault. At least unions like the UAW, Teamsters and Longshoremen.

Good for you - glad to see you're willing to admit this.

Your responses have been measured and, in general, found wanting. You may now revise and extend your remarks.