One party control

[Contumacious]

When the alternative is republicans that listen to tea party crazies???? YES!!!

as expected the first libtard posts bullshit. lets try again: No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this

Redfish, leave off your TeaP talking point.

Many in our GOP think the TeaPs have gone off the deep end, warned you what would happen, and now it is happening.

And NOW you want a conversation?

That an unprincipled socialist scumbag like starkiev can claim membership in the GOP is telling. We do have one party control.

.

 

[Liberal]

Individual freedom and responsibility is not a minority view.

No, it's not.. But, there are differing opinions about how to get there and then there are crazy people who think that the only way to these is through measures that have never worked (both sides).

This is not about winning or losing an election. This is about whether the country is better or worse off if one party is given enough power to dictate its agenda on the entire country.

One thing is for sure, more things will get done.

If a majority of a party is elected in a republic, then it is the will of the people and in-turn the direction they want to go. You can make all the jokes about uneducated voters you want, but, bottom line.. That is the truth. Good or not is totally subjective.

And remember, it might not be your party that is in control.

At this point, I would say that it would be very likely that it would be my party. But, regardless I am not gonna talk about violence as being an option because I did not get my way.

 

[Redfish]

Individual freedom and responsibility is not a minority view.

No, it's not.. But, there are differing opinions about how to get there and then there are crazy people who think that the only way to these is through measures that have never worked (both sides).

This is not about winning or losing an election. This is about whether the country is better or worse off if one party is given enough power to dictate its agenda on the entire country.

One thing is for sure, more things will get done.

If a majority of a party is elected in a republic, then it is the will of the people and in-turn the direction they want to go. You can make all the jokes about uneducated voters you want, but, bottom line.. That is the truth. Good or not is totally subjective.

And remember, it might not be your party that is in control.

At this point, I would say that it would be very likely that it would be my party. But, regardless I am not gonna talk about violence as being an option because I did not get my way.

I never suggested violence. Is physically blocking US veterans from visiting a national monument an act of violence? I think it is.

But you are right, the people deserve what they vote for, Obama is proving that as we speak.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

no precedents???????? how about Germany under Hitler, Cuba under Castro, China under Mao, Venezuela under Chavez, Iran under the Ayatollah?

Quit being so ******* dramatic you baby. Our political climate, regardless of party will never result in that, Jesus.

Those circumstances are entirely different, you ask for an intelligent give/take conversation and then you immediately take any answer and jump off the deep end with it.

Do you think that the average german in the 1930s didn't say that exact same thing? We are at a very critical time in the history of this nation. Denying it will speed up the destruction of everything that millions of americans died to protect.

If you want to insist on a Nazi analogy, where are the brownshirts? Is Obama advocating all mentally ill people be sterilized? Have any specific ethnic groups been targeted and businesses ruined? Has Obama built up a private army somewhere in the U.S. and trotted them out to his speaking stops?

Give us all a break.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

as expected the first libtard posts bullshit. lets try again: No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this

Redfish, leave off your TeaP talking point.

Many in our GOP think the TeaPs have gone off the deep end, warned you what would happen, and now it is happening.

And NOW you want a conversation?

That an unprincipled socialist scumbag like starkiev can claim membership in the GOP is telling. We do have one party control..

We don't let libertarian nuts like Contumacious control anything.

 

[Contumacious]

If you want to insist on a Nazi analogy, where are the brownshirts?

Didn't slick willy use the FBI, BATF and and and the Delta Force in Waco, TX circa 1993?

We also have the DEA, US Marshalls, IRS and , of course, the NSA

That is one massive domestic paramilitary force which would put the gestapo and the SS to shame.


So shut the **** up
.

 

[Redfish]

Quit being so ******* dramatic you baby. Our political climate, regardless of party will never result in that, Jesus.

Those circumstances are entirely different, you ask for an intelligent give/take conversation and then you immediately take any answer and jump off the deep end with it.

Do you think that the average german in the 1930s didn't say that exact same thing? We are at a very critical time in the history of this nation. Denying it will speed up the destruction of everything that millions of americans died to protect.

If you want to insist on a Nazi analogy, where are the brownshirts? Is Obama advocating all mentally ill people be sterilized? Have any specific ethnic groups been targeted and businesses ruined? Has Obama built up a private army somewhere in the U.S. and trotted them out to his speaking stops?

Give us all a break.....

brownshits = OWS
mentally ill sterilized, no, but ACA death panels will exist soon
ethnic groups targeted, no, but conservative groups have been
private army, he has tried to create one.

You better give your devotion to obama and his marxist agenda a break, and allow your brain to function logically. there are lots of nazi parallels.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Since not one of you would answer my earlier question on this, let me put it in a new thread.

Do any of you believe that the country would be better off with one party in full control of the government? Yes or no and why.

No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this.

We very much need a viable two party system.

The problem is the GOP is losing viability.

 

[Contumacious]

Since not one of you would answer my earlier question on this, let me put it in a new thread.

Do any of you believe that the country would be better off with one party in full control of the government? Yes or no and why.

No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this.

We very much need a viable two party system.

The problem is the GOP is losing viability.

The GOP is not losing viability.

The GOP's surrender caucus is merely MERGING with the democrats.

.

 

[Vox]

Since not one of you would answer my earlier question on this, let me put it in a new thread.

Do any of you believe that the country would be better off with one party in full control of the government? Yes or no and why.

No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this.

of course, not.

unless one wants a totalitarian regime.
but I won't advise it - it usually ends very poorly for the wishers FIRST and FOREMOST.

 

[Claudette]

On party control is usually a disaster.

There is no one to stop them from doing exactly what they want to do.

Not a good idea.

 

[Vox]

as expected the first libtard posts bullshit. lets try again: No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this

Redfish, leave off your TeaP talking point.

Many in our GOp think the TeaPs have gone off the deep end, warned you what would happen, and now it is happening.

And NOW you want a conversation?

That an unprincipled socialist scumbag like starkiev can claim membership in the GOP is telling. We do have one party control.

.

fakey has NOTHING to do with GOP. even with it's statist part.

he is a payed leftard troll.

 

[Nyvin]

On party control is usually a disaster.

There is no one to stop them from doing exactly what they want to do.

Not a good idea.

See: the Bush years

 

[westwall]

When the alternative is republicans that listen to tea party crazies???? YES!!!

as expected the first libtard posts bullshit.

lets try again:
No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this

Ask most of America. They will probably give you the same answer involving the Tea Party.

Just because it violates your delicate sensibilities does not mean it is wrong. The truth hurts.

The TPM is highhandedly responsible for the condition of the GOP at this point, they are also going to be the ones that will make a single party system happen. The Dems learned how to control the vocal far far left, they shut them out of politics, GOP needs to do the same thing or they will be dust in the wind.

Is a single party system good? I don't know, not too many precedents there.

Clearly you've never read a bit of history. There's LOTS of precedent. None of it good.

 

[westwall]

no precedents???????? how about Germany under Hitler, Cuba under Castro, China under Mao, Venezuela under Chavez, Iran under the Ayatollah?

Quit being so ******* dramatic you baby. Our political climate, regardless of party will never result in that, Jesus.

Those circumstances are entirely different, you ask for an intelligent give/take conversation and then you immediately take any answer and jump off the deep end with it.

Keep dreaming. The US is exactly headed for that outcome. Wake the hell up and read a book. In fact here's a good one for you, "The NAZI Seizure of Power". We're in chapter 5 right now.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Nazi-Seizure-Power-Experience/dp/0531056333]The Nazi Seizure of Power: The Experience of a Single German Town, 1922-1945, Revised Edition: William Sheridan Allen: 9780531056332: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

 

[Redfish]

no precedents???????? how about Germany under Hitler, Cuba under Castro, China under Mao, Venezuela under Chavez, Iran under the Ayatollah?

Quit being so ******* dramatic you baby. Our political climate, regardless of party will never result in that, Jesus.

Those circumstances are entirely different, you ask for an intelligent give/take conversation and then you immediately take any answer and jump off the deep end with it.

Keep dreaming. The US is exactly headed for that outcome. Wake the hell up and read a book. In fact here's a good one for you, "The NAZI Seizure of Power". We're in chapter 5 right now.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Nazi-Seizure-Power-Experience/dp/0531056333]The Nazi Seizure of Power: The Experience of a Single German Town, 1922-1945, Revised Edition: William Sheridan Allen: 9780531056332: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

Yes, we are. But will the media cover it? Will any commentator dare to admit what is happening? WTF is wrong with the people in this country? Are they all so ignorant and uneducated that the are unable to see what is going on?

 

[Redfish]

Since not one of you would answer my earlier question on this, let me put it in a new thread.

Do any of you believe that the country would be better off with one party in full control of the government? Yes or no and why.

No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this.

We very much need a viable two party system.

The problem is the GOP is losing viability.

Then why are some of you celebrating the assumed demise of the GOP? Which I don't think is happening by the way.

 

[hangover]

There has been one party control. Shrub Jr. had a republican House and Senate when he doubled the national debt.

FDR had a democratic House and Senate when he brought the country out of the Great Depression.

So it all depends on which party.

when you use rhetoric like that you destroy what little crediblity you might have had. Grow up and discuss this like an adult or leave the thread.

Oh pulease, I'd be willing to bet that you have called Obama far worse. Don't be a hypocrite. Clinton's nickname was Bubba to the cons. I call him that too. One of Shrub's fellow Texans gave his daddy that nickname back in the 80's.

I believe that eventually the people will necessarily conclude that violence is the only viable alternative.

Only the ignorant "believe" that. War has been going on for thousands of years, and never solved ANYTHING. "War doesn't decide who's right, only who's left." History never tells the truth, because it's always written by the assholes that killed the most.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I would rather have one party control, where the one party reflects the will of a majority, than rule by a party that represents at most 25%, which is what the TPM just tried.

what if the one party does not reflect the will of the majority AFTER it takes power? What if they lie in order to get control?

This idiot doesn't understand the potential pitfalls (or the absolute dangers) of a one party regime. Ask anyone who lived in the former Soviet Union - or North Korea - or Iran

Idiot liberals.

 

[deaddogseye]

Since not one of you would answer my earlier question on this, let me put it in a new thread.

Do any of you believe that the country would be better off with one party in full control of the government? Yes or no and why.

No talking points please, lets see if we can have a civil rational discussion of this.

no it would not. We are never better off when we are subjected to the excesses of either party and that is what you get when you have one party control. It is inherently good IMO for it to be extemely hard for government to act which is why i dont share the view of so many that the current "crisis" is a crisis at all.