Is republicanism nothing but flowery speeches, negativity, and the promotion of liberal stereotypes?

[Dan Daly]

I LOVE Republicanism and Republicans. ...Without them Democrats wouldn't seem as good. It's the comparison to batshit crazy people that makes them look so much better.

"Republicanism is the ideology of governing a society or state as a republic (la. res publica), where the head of state is a representative of the people who hold popular sovereignty rather than the people being subjects of the head of state."

So you feel that it's only the Democrats who feel that they are subjects of the head of state, rather than both major parties? Nice. I'm sure the DNC appreciates it!

While I didn't introduce the notion of heads of state and just batshit crazy, thanks for proving the concept.

YOU used the term Republicanism, princess, don't blame me if you don't understand what the word means. The only thing you proved is that you parrot words you don't understand. Well done!

 

[donald larson]

It seems like that's all republican officials have to offer. They give flowery speeches with words like "freedom", "constitution", and "free market" repeated over and over until the tea baggers cream themselves.

From there they bitch and whine about Obama, socialism, and ObamaCare.

Where is the substance? Where is the specific planning they have for the country to better it? They go on and on about creating jobs, but they never come up with specific policies to do it. When they finally do make it to office they cut taxes for the wealthy and nothing happens except for more national debt.

Once again I ask, WHY vote republican? Give me specific reasons why i should vote republican.

-----

Oh, Hell No! WSJ Editorial said today that three of the GOP's Goals are to make Tax Cuts; Budget Cuts (Social Programs), and Deregulation! Clearly, all three goals are, "Pro-Rich," Ones! All three are Carry-overs from previous Republican Administrations; and contributed significantly to the Financial Mess & Poverty that exists today in the U.S. Imagine! Releasing the Rent-Seeking Beasts in ALL of our Economic Sectors; as was done with the Financial Sector! Bush's Tax Cuts for the Rich; cost the Government $6.6 Trillion Dollars in lost Revenue over a Ten year period. And, those Tax Cuts were fully operational while Bush/Cheney ran up the National Debt to $12 Trillion Dollars; before leaving Office. That's another Simple Definition of, "INSANITY!" that we can all understand!

 

[TooTall]

It seems like that's all republican officials have to offer. They give flowery speeches with words like "freedom", "constitution", and "free market" repeated over and over until the tea baggers cream themselves.

From there they bitch and whine about Obama, socialism, and ObamaCare.

Where is the substance? Where is the specific planning they have for the country to better it? They go on and on about creating jobs, but they never come up with specific policies to do it. When they finally do make it to office they cut taxes for the wealthy and nothing happens except for more national debt.

Once again I ask, WHY vote republican? Give me specific reasons why i should vote republican.

If you are not interested in freedom, the Constitution or the free market, you shouldn't vote for a Republican. Republicans have passed dozens of jobs bill that are in Harry Reids in basket and they cut income taxes for all taxpayers. Since "wealth" is not taxed in the US, and income is, may I ask where you are from?

 

[teapartysamurai]

Whatever is wrong with New York and Michigan took 40 years or more to happen. Kansas has dropped into the shit can starting the month that the Tea Party won the governor's race last election.

Oh please! Nice try. But there are blue states WAY under Kansas!

Keep making excuses.

Why can't you have the maturity to admit that cutting taxes for the wealthy does jack shit for the lower classes?

Because the whole premise is a lie.

When you cut taxes, they get cut for EVERYONE.

You just can't stand that people might have more money to spend AS THEY CHOOSE rather than the government taking it all away.

Funny how liberals are for "CHOICE" unless they choose to actually let a baby live, vote for the candidate of their choice, own a gun, keep more of the money they earn, or speak their mind. Then liberals are against choice all the way

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

 

[Dan Daly]

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

 

[Billy000]

Whatever is wrong with New York and Michigan took 40 years or more to happen. Kansas has dropped into the shit can starting the month that the Tea Party won the governor's race last election.

Oh please! Nice try. But there are blue states WAY under Kansas!

Keep making excuses.

Why can't you have the maturity to admit that cutting taxes for the wealthy does jack shit for the lower classes?

Because the whole premise is a lie.

When you cut taxes, they get cut for EVERYONE.

You just can't stand that people might have more money to spend AS THEY CHOOSE rather than the government taking it all away.

Funny how liberals are for "CHOICE" unless they choose to actually let a baby live, vote for the candidate of their choice, own a gun, keep more of the money they earn, or speak their mind. Then liberals are against choice all the way

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

 

[teapartysamurai]

Oh please! Nice try. But there are blue states WAY under Kansas!

Keep making excuses.

Why can't you have the maturity to admit that cutting taxes for the wealthy does jack shit for the lower classes?

Because the whole premise is a lie.

When you cut taxes, they get cut for EVERYONE.

You just can't stand that people might have more money to spend AS THEY CHOOSE rather than the government taking it all away.

Funny how liberals are for "CHOICE" unless they choose to actually let a baby live, vote for the candidate of their choice, own a gun, keep more of the money they earn, or speak their mind. Then liberals are against choice all the way

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

 

[Dan Daly]

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Wow, talk about setting the bar low. I think a trained monkey with a blow-up football could do a better job than Bush did...hopefully your standards for the latest crown POTUS are higher than that.

 

[Billy000]

Why can't you have the maturity to admit that cutting taxes for the wealthy does jack shit for the lower classes?

Because the whole premise is a lie.

When you cut taxes, they get cut for EVERYONE.

You just can't stand that people might have more money to spend AS THEY CHOOSE rather than the government taking it all away.

Funny how liberals are for "CHOICE" unless they choose to actually let a baby live, vote for the candidate of their choice, own a gun, keep more of the money they earn, or speak their mind. Then liberals are against choice all the way

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Because the whole premise is a lie.

When you cut taxes, they get cut for EVERYONE.

You just can't stand that people might have more money to spend AS THEY CHOOSE rather than the government taking it all away.

Funny how liberals are for "CHOICE" unless they choose to actually let a baby live, vote for the candidate of their choice, own a gun, keep more of the money they earn, or speak their mind. Then liberals are against choice all the way

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

Oh that's funny. That's all you libs do is show "growth" under Obama. You claim Wallstreet is doing great, because Obama bails them out.

You make all kinds of claims about job growth, but you can't back it up with honest unemployment numbers.

But when you compared how the "poor" did under Reagan to how they are doing under Obama, then you really play with the numbers.

The fact is, the poor are suffering badly under Obama. Working two part time jobs, if they can find it.

The group suffering the most is the black community.

Compare black unemployment rates under Bush to now.

Then you really see who cares about the poor.

The PJ Tatler How Much Worse Off are Blacks Under Obama

And I know Reagan isn't on the ballot. YOU BROUGHT UP supply side economics, not I.

 

[Billy000]

Obama's stimulus package created almost 3 million jobs. That's 3x as many jobs in both of Bush's terms.

Onswipe

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

Oh that's funny. That's all you libs do is show "growth" under Obama. You claim Wallstreet is doing great, because Obama bails them out.

You make all kinds of claims about job growth, but you can't back it up with honest unemployment numbers.

But when you compared how the "poor" did under Reagan to how they are doing under Obama, then you really play with the numbers.

The fact is, the poor are suffering badly under Obama. Working two part time jobs, if they can find it.

The group suffering the most is the black community.

Compare black unemployment rates under Bush to now.

Then you really see who cares about the poor.

The PJ Tatler How Much Worse Off are Blacks Under Obama

And I know Reagan isn't on the ballot. YOU BROUGHT UP supply side economics, not I.

Well the difference between the poor under Reagan and Obama is that Obama actually tried to help the poor by trying to raise the minimum wage. The investment class is also doing better than ever Obama. Oh and the unemployment rate now is better than it was when Obama first came to office.

Raising the minimum wage to 10.10 would lift 16.5 million people out of poverty. Any jobs lost would be regained from the increase in economic demand.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44995-MinimumWage.pdf

Yet another example of republicans blocking what works.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Yeah yeah yeah, that's why Democrats think they are about to get their heads handed to them, because thear are sooooooooooo many jobs out there!

You can lie about the economy, but you can't lie to yourselves.

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

Oh that's funny. That's all you libs do is show "growth" under Obama. You claim Wallstreet is doing great, because Obama bails them out.

You make all kinds of claims about job growth, but you can't back it up with honest unemployment numbers.

But when you compared how the "poor" did under Reagan to how they are doing under Obama, then you really play with the numbers.

The fact is, the poor are suffering badly under Obama. Working two part time jobs, if they can find it.

The group suffering the most is the black community.

Compare black unemployment rates under Bush to now.

Then you really see who cares about the poor.

The PJ Tatler How Much Worse Off are Blacks Under Obama

And I know Reagan isn't on the ballot. YOU BROUGHT UP supply side economics, not I.

Well the difference between the poor under Reagan and Obama is that Obama actually tried to help the poor by trying to raise the minimum wage. The investment class is also doing better than ever Obama. Oh and the unemployment rate now is better than it was when Obama first came to office.

Raising the minimum wage to 10.10 would lift 16.5 million people out of poverty. Any jobs lost would be regained from the increase in economic demand.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44995-MinimumWage.pdf

Yet another example of republicans blocking what works.

HERE WE GO! BWAHAHAHAHAA!

When liberal policies fail, you are never to judge the RESULTS. Noooooooooooooo, just the WAIT FOR IT . . . . GOOD INTENTIONS!

Just as Rush Limbaugh has always said. Thanks for proving him right.

NEVER judge liberal policies on their results, just the "good intentions."

Because Republicans NEVER have good intentions right? Noooooooooooooo!

NO ONLY LIBERALS HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS.

It's just sooooooooo unfair to judge liberal policies on results. You can only judge the intentions.

Truly hilarious!

 

[Vandalshandle]

I earned a BBA with a minor in Economics. One of the things that they taught me was that if the nation is $18 trillion in debt, cutting taxes is probably not a good idea....

But, of course, in the alternative universe of the Conservatives, pigs fly and corporations put the public good before profits, so anything is possible.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I earned a BBA with a minor in Economics. One of the things that they taught me was that if the nation is $18 trillion in debt, cutting taxes is probably not a good idea....

But, of course, in the alternative universe of the Conservatives, pigs fly and corporations put the public good before profits, so anything is possible.

Yeah, and liberal profs are never wrong on economics right? After all, they've never worked outside of their cloistered university "reality."

They know everything!

 

[Billy000]

Lol you haven't explained why Bush's job growth was so pathetic. Why despite his ridiculous tax cuts?

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

Oh that's funny. That's all you libs do is show "growth" under Obama. You claim Wallstreet is doing great, because Obama bails them out.

You make all kinds of claims about job growth, but you can't back it up with honest unemployment numbers.

But when you compared how the "poor" did under Reagan to how they are doing under Obama, then you really play with the numbers.

The fact is, the poor are suffering badly under Obama. Working two part time jobs, if they can find it.

The group suffering the most is the black community.

Compare black unemployment rates under Bush to now.

Then you really see who cares about the poor.

The PJ Tatler How Much Worse Off are Blacks Under Obama

And I know Reagan isn't on the ballot. YOU BROUGHT UP supply side economics, not I.

Well the difference between the poor under Reagan and Obama is that Obama actually tried to help the poor by trying to raise the minimum wage. The investment class is also doing better than ever Obama. Oh and the unemployment rate now is better than it was when Obama first came to office.

Raising the minimum wage to 10.10 would lift 16.5 million people out of poverty. Any jobs lost would be regained from the increase in economic demand.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44995-MinimumWage.pdf

Yet another example of republicans blocking what works.

HERE WE GO! BWAHAHAHAHAA!

When liberal policies fail, you are never to judge the RESULTS. Noooooooooooooo, just the WAIT FOR IT . . . . GOOD INTENTIONS!

Just as Rush Limbaugh has always said. Thanks for proving him right.

NEVER judge liberal policies on their results, just the "good intentions."

Because Republicans NEVER have good intentions right? Noooooooooooooo!

NO ONLY LIBERALS HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS.

It's just sooooooooo unfair to judge liberal policies on results. You can only judge the intentions.

Truly hilarious!

Are you kidding me? I showed you proof liberal policies work. Obama's stimulus also created close to 3 million jobs. You whine and pout that it isn't true but you would only be embarrassing yourself as the tea bagger you are.

Like I said, you people have nothing.

 

[Billy000]

I earned a BBA with a minor in Economics. One of the things that they taught me was that if the nation is $18 trillion in debt, cutting taxes is probably not a good idea....

But, of course, in the alternative universe of the Conservatives, pigs fly and corporations put the public good before profits, so anything is possible.

Yeah, and liberal profs are never wrong on economics right? After all, they've never worked outside of their cloistered university "reality."

They know everything!

One of the chief reasons the debt skyrocketed under both Bush and Obama is Bush's tax cuts. The other is defense spending which you tea baggers love.

 

[Roadrunner]

hyperpartisan posts another biased hyperpartisan thread.

When a lib accuses a conservative of something, it is really a self-confession.

Straight out of Alinsky.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Because I DON'T HAVE TO!

Bush's policies aren't on the ballot, OBAMA'S ARE!

Nether is Reagan assclown. All you repubs have to show for is job growth under Reagan. That's it. He made the poor more poor and the rich richer. Job growth under both Bush's was pathetic. 10.3 million under Obama. Clinton's job growth was just as good as Reagan's. You people got nothing.

Oh that's funny. That's all you libs do is show "growth" under Obama. You claim Wallstreet is doing great, because Obama bails them out.

You make all kinds of claims about job growth, but you can't back it up with honest unemployment numbers.

But when you compared how the "poor" did under Reagan to how they are doing under Obama, then you really play with the numbers.

The fact is, the poor are suffering badly under Obama. Working two part time jobs, if they can find it.

The group suffering the most is the black community.

Compare black unemployment rates under Bush to now.

Then you really see who cares about the poor.

The PJ Tatler How Much Worse Off are Blacks Under Obama

And I know Reagan isn't on the ballot. YOU BROUGHT UP supply side economics, not I.

Well the difference between the poor under Reagan and Obama is that Obama actually tried to help the poor by trying to raise the minimum wage. The investment class is also doing better than ever Obama. Oh and the unemployment rate now is better than it was when Obama first came to office.

Raising the minimum wage to 10.10 would lift 16.5 million people out of poverty. Any jobs lost would be regained from the increase in economic demand.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44995-MinimumWage.pdf

Yet another example of republicans blocking what works.

HERE WE GO! BWAHAHAHAHAA!

When liberal policies fail, you are never to judge the RESULTS. Noooooooooooooo, just the WAIT FOR IT . . . . GOOD INTENTIONS!

Just as Rush Limbaugh has always said. Thanks for proving him right.

NEVER judge liberal policies on their results, just the "good intentions."

Because Republicans NEVER have good intentions right? Noooooooooooooo!

NO ONLY LIBERALS HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS.

It's just sooooooooo unfair to judge liberal policies on results. You can only judge the intentions.

Truly hilarious!

Are you kidding me? I showed you proof liberal policies work. Obama's stimulus also created close to 3 million jobs. You whine and pout that it isn't true but you would only be embarrassing yourself as the tea bagger you are.

Like I said, you people have nothing.

YOU'RE KIDDING ME, if you think your bull crap STATS are going to prove what my own eyes can see is true.

You libs can lie and play with the data all you want. Reality isn't going to change because you lie about it.

People can see the truth and and you KNOW it's the truth, or you wouldn't be whining about the slaughter you think is coming up this election day.

As Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

That's all libs have right now. Lies, damn lies and statistics. Reality won't roll over and play dead for lies.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I earned a BBA with a minor in Economics. One of the things that they taught me was that if the nation is $18 trillion in debt, cutting taxes is probably not a good idea....

But, of course, in the alternative universe of the Conservatives, pigs fly and corporations put the public good before profits, so anything is possible.

Yeah, and liberal profs are never wrong on economics right? After all, they've never worked outside of their cloistered university "reality."

They know everything!

One of the chief reasons the debt skyrocketed under both Bush and Obama is Bush's tax cuts. The other is defense spending which you tea baggers love.

Yeah, because the debt hasn't sky rocketed under Obama right???????

Good grief you are so full of partisan hackery, you can't even hear yourself.

 

[Roadrunner]

hyperpartisan posts another biased hyperpartisan thread.

What are some specific republican policies that help the country as a whole besides tax cuts?

Why don't you post your party's platform here...let's deconstruct it point by point and talk about "meaningless platitudes" and "flowery speeches"...LMAO...

I asked you first. Just answer the question. This shouldn't be hard. If you do, I'll tell you why it's better to vote dem right afterwards even though you should be an adult and make your own thread for it.

I'm smart enough and old enough to know that neither party is any different and no matter who is in office.... "D" or "R"...nothing changes.
Government grows bigger, more expensive, more infiltrated, more corrupt and more dysfunctional...yes..even when "your" vastly superior party is in office, too, little partisan.

When you grow up and have lived and gained some life experience, you'll begin to notice these things, too.
Until then, little partisan, keep dancing when "your" party pulls the strings. They keep you occupied squabbling and arguing for them while behind your back they continue to do the same things the other party does.

Go ahead and post you party platform..Let's look it over?

I'll agree democrats can be useless and spend like republicans but they do have policies that work.

Extending unemployment benefits stimulates economic demand. Consumer spending is down.

Raising the minimum wage to 10.10 would give 16.5 million people a wage they can live off of.

Job training programs instituted for community colleges.

Marriage equality

Equal pay for women

I believe you need a link here.

Also, raise the minimum wage, all prices rise, and the minimum wage earner still can't live off of it.

Minimum wage is not intended to be a living wage.

It is a starting place for trainees and teen part time workers.

Most minimum wage dollars probably end up in the hands of middle class kids living at home.

I cannot imagine what kind of idiot is stuck and minimum wage, with no raises, and still thinks he/she/it deserves more.

Don't like your wage, up your output!