Why Conservatives Can't Govern

[bucs90]

Presidents don't "pass policy". Good lord, take a civics class.

Have you ever heard of Presidential Policy Directives? Seems to me you are the one who needs to take a civics class.

Yet here you are saying the federal government controls local fire departments. Cite in the Constitution where it says Presidents can pass legislation and bypass the congressional process. Thanks.

It's right behind the page in the Constitution that says the president, while in Rio, can order planes to drop bombs and special forces soldiers to be on the ground in a foreign country that is not an imminent threat to the USA...without asking Congress. It's right behind that.

 

[Liberty]

Care to stick to the subject you started, rather than lamely attempting to deflect over to this or that cozy relationship with big business, which are hardly the exclusive territory of republicans?

Didn't read the entire OP did you? One of the main points of the quote in the OP relates to the relationship between the Republican Party and Big Business.

The love affair between the GOP and BB is well known, and much, much more intense than any such between the Dems and BB. Let's consider labor unions v. management. Who ya for there, Mojambo? Who is the GOP for on that one? "Tort Reform" is nothing more than a thinly veiled plum for the medical industry at the expense of the individual patient. Last time I looked, it wasn't the Dems who are touting "Tort Reform." Environmental issues - I don't see too many Republicans wanting to close down factories because they are polluting the environment.

Well?

How about you stop ignoring points and address them. Well?

Also, I don't see many democrats mad at China for producing our solar panels at cheaper rates but with much higher rates of pollution. Typical liberal trying to play both sides hypocrite. Can't help but be entertained by your type, you know...the dumbass type.

 

[George Costanza]

If you say conservatives "cant govern" then I return by saying liberals "shouldn't govern".


And of course military, police and fire are gov't jobs. They must be. If not, then poor people would be raped and robbed without the protection of the police. It's just that simple. If poilce were private, only serving and protecting those who pay, then an attractive poor girl would be raped every single day. And of course, if a person didn't pay for a private police force, would that person be subject to the jurisdiction/authority of that police force? Also, combating a foreign invasion, domestic crime/violence, and fires are missions that are highly dangerous, and require PRE-training of people, thus, needing funding to have a force ready to respond BEFORE the act occurs.

Common sense tells us that the military, police and fire dept are gov't roles.

Common sense does NOT tell us that gov't is tasked with banning salt and soda, forcing us to buy private health insurance, and filing lawsuits against a state trying to keep illegal criminals out of it's borders after the federal gov't refuses to.

Common sense tells us that even dirt poor women shouldn't be raped, thus, a common police force must be funded.

Common sense does not tell us that the federal government should force all states to tolerate gay marriage.

Common sense tells us that in a world full of modern militaries, a civilian militia will not hold up against an invasion, hence the need for a federal, full-time army.

Common sense does NOT tell us that the government should in 2010 be able to ban the act of singing (Summer 2010, Town of Sullivan's Island, SC, banned singing on it's island due to resident complaints).



Common sense says we must fund a police department. Common sense does NOT then say the federal government should force the hiring standards of that police dept to be lowered in order to have a more racially diverse staff. Obama, however, disagrees.

Well stated.

 

[bucs90]

Care to stick to the subject you started, rather than lamely attempting to deflect over to this or that cozy relationship with big business, which are hardly the exclusive territory of republicans?

Didn't read the entire OP did you? One of the main points of the quote in the OP relates to the relationship between the Republican Party and Big Business.

The love affair between the GOP and BB is well known, and much, much more intense than any such between the Dems and BB. Let's consider labor unions v. management. Who ya for there, Mojambo? Who is the GOP for on that one? "Tort Reform" is nothing more than a thinly veiled plum for the medical industry at the expense of the individual patient. Last time I looked, it wasn't the Dems who are touting "Tort Reform." Environmental issues - I don't see too many Republicans wanting to close down factories because they are polluting the environment.

Well?

Easy answers.

If I need a job, management can hire me. The union can't. I side with management.

You libtards just refuse to accept the FACT.......yes, capital F, A, C, T, that private companies create jobs, and managers hire, fire and pay employees.

You morons are still stuck in the 17 year old kid mentality of hating your boss because.....well, you know, he makes you work for the money and show up on time.

The union FORCES me to contribute. What if I don't want to? What if I just want to work my job, go home, and be left alone. What if I LIKE my job and my boss, and CHOOSE to not join the union? You are Pro-Choice, right?

 

[George Costanza]

Presidents don't "pass policy". Good lord, take a civics class.

Have you ever heard of Presidential Policy Directives? Seems to me you are the one who needs to take a civics class.

Yet here you are saying the federal government controls local fire departments. Cite in the Constitution where it says Presidents can pass legislation and bypass the congressional process. Thanks.

I think you must have a cognitive recognition problem. Your thinking is disjointed.

You said Presidents don't pass policy. I was pointing out that they do - via policy directives. George Bush issued dozens and dozens of them. Google "preisdential polciy directives" and read up a bit on them. You'll be fine.

Next, you claim that I said that the federal government controls local fire departments. I never said any such thing. Everyone knows that fire departments are controlled by local government. I was responding to a statement by Oddball where he said that the governement should not be in the business of solving problems. He did not qualify his use of the word, "problems." I was merely pointing out that government does indeed solve all kinds of problems. It was after this exchange, that the discussion got expanded to problems on the federal level only.

I don't expect you to understand any of this. Perhaps if you can print it up and take it to an adult who might be able to help you with it.

 

[Oddball]

Care to stick to the subject you started, rather than lamely attempting to deflect over to this or that cozy relationship with big business, which are hardly the exclusive territory of republicans?

Didn't read the entire OP did you? One of the main points of the quote in the OP relates to the relationship between the Republican Party and Big Business.

The love affair between the GOP and BB is well known, and much, much more intense than any such between the Dems and BB. Let's consider labor unions v. management. Who ya for there, Mojambo? Who is the GOP for on that one? "Tort Reform" is nothing more than a thinly veiled plum for the medical industry at the expense of the individual patient. Last time I looked, it wasn't the Dems who are touting "Tort Reform." Environmental issues - I don't see too many Republicans wanting to close down factories because they are polluting the environment.

Well?

Two words: Jeff Immelt.

I rest my case.

 

[Liberty]

hahahaha, dude, whatever, you stick your dick in the (federal)government's mouth and sure, it'll lick and suck it for a while. Then, it will start to bite a little, maybe scrape its teeth on your soft skin a little bit, and then it will ask for your money. You can't take the pain, so you pay....then government bites even harder and takes your dick right off. At this point you regret trusting the government. You watch, that is history.

 

[George Costanza]

Care to stick to the subject you started, rather than lamely attempting to deflect over to this or that cozy relationship with big business, which are hardly the exclusive territory of republicans?

Didn't read the entire OP did you? One of the main points of the quote in the OP relates to the relationship between the Republican Party and Big Business.

The love affair between the GOP and BB is well known, and much, much more intense than any such between the Dems and BB. Let's consider labor unions v. management. Who ya for there, Mojambo? Who is the GOP for on that one? "Tort Reform" is nothing more than a thinly veiled plum for the medical industry at the expense of the individual patient. Last time I looked, it wasn't the Dems who are touting "Tort Reform." Environmental issues - I don't see too many Republicans wanting to close down factories because they are polluting the environment.

Well?

Easy answers.

If I need a job, management can hire me. The union can't. I side with management.

You libtards just refuse to accept the FACT.......yes, capital F, A, C, T, that private companies create jobs, and managers hire, fire and pay employees.

You morons are still stuck in the 17 year old kid mentality of hating your boss because.....well, you know, he makes you work for the money and show up on time.

The union FORCES me to contribute. What if I don't want to? What if I just want to work my job, go home, and be left alone. What if I LIKE my job and my boss, and CHOOSE to not join the union? You are Pro-Choice, right?

You are confirming my point. I am not asking for a discussion of whether being on the side of Big Business is good or bad. I am merely pointing out that the Republicans have traditionally been on the side of Big Business for a long, long time. You are merely confirming that this is indeed the case. I take it you are a Republican and/or a conservtive, right?

 

[George Costanza]

hahahaha, dude, whatever, you stick your dick in the government's mouth and it's going to bite it off, just like history has shown every time.

"Dude"? "Stick your dick in the government's mouth"?

Game over. Go out and play with the other children.

 

[Trajan]

In 2007, political scientist, author and professor of political science at the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College, Alan Wolfe, wrote an article for Washington Monthly, titled "Why Conservatives Can't Govern." In that article, he stated:

"Liberals, while enjoying the perquisites of office, also want to be in a position to use government to solve problems. But conservatives have different motives for wanting power. One is to prevent liberals from doing so; if government cannot be made to disappear, at least it can be prevented from doing any good. The other is to build a political machine in which business and the Republican Party can exchange mutual favors; business will lavish cash on politicians (called campaign comtributions) while politicians will throw the money back at business (called public policy). Conservatism will always attract its share of young idealists. And young idealists will always be disillusioned by the sheer amount of corruption that people like Gingrich and DeLay generate. If yesterday's conservative was a liberal mugged by reality, today's is a free-marketer fattened by pork."

Strong words - and obviously written by one with a liberal agenda. But how close to truth are these words? Few can deny the love affair that has been going on between Big Business and the Republican Party lo these many decades. Few can deny the way in which the Republican Party has attempted to strangle Democratic attempts to do, well, just about anything. You may differ, but I have not seen anything close to approaching that coming from the left toward the right.

No corruption here, you say. Hmmm . . . now just exactly what is it that Tom DeLay is doing these days . . . . . ?

Strong words. Words for discussion, seems to me. Anyone want to step up?

you can flip flop lib for con and rep for dem, dem for rep in almost every instance there and not miss a beat and if that gentleman cannot see it from what appears to be his end of the number line, hes blind drunk or so intellectually dishonest he should be in an asylum somewhere doodling on a wall with a crayon.

 

[Liberty]

hahahaha, dude, whatever, you stick your dick in the government's mouth and it's going to bite it off, just like history has shown every time.

"Dude"? "Stick your dick in the government's mouth"?

Game over. Go out and play with the other children.

Analogy | Define Analogy at Dictionary.com

 

[Oddball]

You are confirming my point. I am not asking for a discussion of whether being on the side of Big Business is good or bad. I am merely pointing out that the Republicans have traditionally been on the side of Big Business for a long, long time.

That is such TOTAL bullshit!

What about the cozy relationship between BigAg and guys like Tom Harkin, for ETOH handouts?

What about the cozy relationship (read: GRAFT) between Dianne Frankenstein and the defense contractor, of which her husband was a high ranking officer?

Then we have Jeff Immelt...

Faulty premises, within faulty premises, within faulty premises......

 

[George Costanza]

In 2007, political scientist, author and professor of political science at the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College, Alan Wolfe, wrote an article for Washington Monthly, titled "Why Conservatives Can't Govern." In that article, he stated:

"Liberals, while enjoying the perquisites of office, also want to be in a position to use government to solve problems. But conservatives have different motives for wanting power. One is to prevent liberals from doing so; if government cannot be made to disappear, at least it can be prevented from doing any good. The other is to build a political machine in which business and the Republican Party can exchange mutual favors; business will lavish cash on politicians (called campaign comtributions) while politicians will throw the money back at business (called public policy). Conservatism will always attract its share of young idealists. And young idealists will always be disillusioned by the sheer amount of corruption that people like Gingrich and DeLay generate. If yesterday's conservative was a liberal mugged by reality, today's is a free-marketer fattened by pork."

Strong words - and obviously written by one with a liberal agenda. But how close to truth are these words? Few can deny the love affair that has been going on between Big Business and the Republican Party lo these many decades. Few can deny the way in which the Republican Party has attempted to strangle Democratic attempts to do, well, just about anything. You may differ, but I have not seen anything close to approaching that coming from the left toward the right.

No corruption here, you say. Hmmm . . . now just exactly what is it that Tom DeLay is doing these days . . . . . ?

Strong words. Words for discussion, seems to me. Anyone want to step up?

you can flip flop lib for con and rep for dem, dem for rep in almost every instance there and not miss a beat and if that gentleman cannot see it from what appears to be his end of the number line, hes blind drunk or so intellectually dishonest he should be in an asylum somewhere doodling on a wall with a crayon.

Wrong.

 

[George Costanza]

You are confirming my point. I am not asking for a discussion of whether being on the side of Big Business is good or bad. I am merely pointing out that the Republicans have traditionally been on the side of Big Business for a long, long time.

That is such TOTAL bullshit!

What about the cozy relationship between BigAg and guys like Tom Harkin, for ETOH handouts?

What about the cozy relationship (read: GRAFT) between Dianne Frankenstein and the defense contractor, of which her husband was a high ranking officer?

Faulty premises, within faulty premises, within faulty premises......

You are addressing my point. He wasn't. You can see that, can't you?

 

[Oddball]

You are confirming my point. I am not asking for a discussion of whether being on the side of Big Business is good or bad. I am merely pointing out that the Republicans have traditionally been on the side of Big Business for a long, long time.

That is such TOTAL bullshit!

What about the cozy relationship between BigAg and guys like Tom Harkin, for ETOH handouts?

What about the cozy relationship (read: GRAFT) between Dianne Frankenstein and the defense contractor, of which her husband was a high ranking officer?

Faulty premises, within faulty premises, within faulty premises......

You are addressing my point. He wasn't. You can see that, can't you?

I'm addressing the point that the author in the OP is a totally blind partisan hack.

Playing to the stereotype that republicans have a monopoly, or even run in the lead over democrats, on playing footsie with BigBiz is as fraudulent a premise as you can begin with.

Figures, though, seeing as the author in question was a Clintoon flack.

 

[emilynghiem]

RE: Why Conservatives/Liberals fail to govern effectively

1. Conservatives have faith that business can govern itself by free market
and individuals can govern themselves better with less government.
However, corporations too easily abuse freedom to take advantage without check.
And individuals who are not educated or positioned to be self-sufficient yet,
will not have equal representation or protection in a competitive environment
with bullying going on by "majority rule" or economic/political influence over "consent."

So trying to govern with minimal regulation does not work in a system that is already overrun with abuses going on that require corrections to the same degree.

2. Liberals tend to push for equality and social justice. This is best done by private charities, educational and locally-accountable programs, etc. However, instead of investing in solutions on that level, the push is for government to mandate and fund these programs globally. The best solutions work from the grassroots up, and cannot be legislated from the top down! This is like abusing federal government for what the church or people can do more effectively locally instead. So that is why that fails, it is best to keep the programs local where there is more direct accountability, that is lost in a large bureaucracy, and also the ability to achieve self-government through education and training instead of dependence on government.

3. Both sides tend to fear and paint the other along the most diametrically opposing points for political lobbying purposes to get into office. So both parties spend millions if not billions of dollars campaigning back and forth when those resources could have gone directly into solutions all parties could agree to, if they focused on that instead.

In the meantime, taking turns dominating either the Congress or the White House has made for lopsided representation, of one major party or the other; compromising the Constitutional duty of federal officials to represent the public interest of the whole nation, not just the people who get them elected, which is biased and discrimination by party.
See Code of Ethics for Govt Service: ethics-commission.net

Until both parties cooperate and agree to share representation such as having a mixed party ticket, resources and public attention is lost on political infighting that doesn't solve the real problems. Both parties defeat their own purpose by putting political agenda and competition before the interests of our diverse population and policies that reflect that.

 

[Trajan]

In 2007, political scientist, author and professor of political science at the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College, Alan Wolfe, wrote an article for Washington Monthly, titled "Why Conservatives Can't Govern." In that article, he stated:



Strong words - and obviously written by one with a liberal agenda. But how close to truth are these words? Few can deny the love affair that has been going on between Big Business and the Republican Party lo these many decades. Few can deny the way in which the Republican Party has attempted to strangle Democratic attempts to do, well, just about anything. You may differ, but I have not seen anything close to approaching that coming from the left toward the right.

No corruption here, you say. Hmmm . . . now just exactly what is it that Tom DeLay is doing these days . . . . . ?

Strong words. Words for discussion, seems to me. Anyone want to step up?

you can flip flop lib for con and rep for dem, dem for rep in almost every instance there and not miss a beat and if that gentleman cannot see it from what appears to be his end of the number line, hes blind drunk or so intellectually dishonest he should be in an asylum somewhere doodling on a wall with a crayon.

Wrong.

no, I think its dead on, there is little difference in either party when it comes to playing to certain players and factions, their factions and playas may be of different stripes but alas, in the end, its all special interests and almost equally destructive.

Apparently you are of the mind that, pardon the vulgarity here but republican shit stinks but democratic shit doesn't, that's ridiculous, you just happen to like and/or see as efficacious democratic or progressive gov..

 

[Trajan]

Didn't read the entire OP did you? One of the main points of the quote in the OP relates to the relationship between the Republican Party and Big Business.

The love affair between the GOP and BB is well known, and much, much more intense than any such between the Dems and BB. Let's consider labor unions v. management. Who ya for there, Mojambo? Who is the GOP for on that one? "Tort Reform" is nothing more than a thinly veiled plum for the medical industry at the expense of the individual patient. Last time I looked, it wasn't the Dems who are touting "Tort Reform." Environmental issues - I don't see too many Republicans wanting to close down factories because they are polluting the environment.

Well?

Easy answers.

If I need a job, management can hire me. The union can't. I side with management.

You libtards just refuse to accept the FACT.......yes, capital F, A, C, T, that private companies create jobs, and managers hire, fire and pay employees.

You morons are still stuck in the 17 year old kid mentality of hating your boss because.....well, you know, he makes you work for the money and show up on time.

The union FORCES me to contribute. What if I don't want to? What if I just want to work my job, go home, and be left alone. What if I LIKE my job and my boss, and CHOOSE to not join the union? You are Pro-Choice, right?

You are confirming my point. I am not asking for a discussion of whether being on the side of Big Business is good or bad. I am merely pointing out that the Republicans have traditionally been on the side of Big Business for a long, long time. You are merely confirming that this is indeed the case. I take it you are a Republican and/or a conservtive, right?

if you check say, open secrets, you'll find that big bus and financial commonly hedge their bets.

I have a feeling you really don't want to have the real argument, that big bus. and giant banks and financial inst. operate freely across both party lines, but, the dems prefer to strangle them with taxs and then play the come hither game, telling them to sit at the table ( ala big pharma siding apparently against their own interests, providing obama a free 150 million worth of ads on TV pro obamacare) or be eviscerated, while rep.s just promise them stuff up front.

 

[George Costanza]

you can flip flop lib for con and rep for dem, dem for rep in almost every instance there and not miss a beat and if that gentleman cannot see it from what appears to be his end of the number line, hes blind drunk or so intellectually dishonest he should be in an asylum somewhere doodling on a wall with a crayon.

Wrong.

no, I think its dead on, there is little difference in either party when it comes to playing to certain players and factions, their factions and playas may be of different stripes but alas, in the end, its all special interests and almost equally destructive.

Apparently you are of the mind that, pardon the vulgarity here but republican shit stinks but democratic shit doesn't, that's ridiculous, you just happen to like and/or see as efficacious democratic or progressive gov..

OK - I think it is true, that, in general, the Republican Party caters to Big Business much more than does the Democratic Party. If you cannot see that, I don't know where you have been in recent decades.

 

[Oddball]

OK - I think it is true, that, in general, the Republican Party caters to Big Business much more than does the Democratic Party. If you cannot see that, I don't know where you have been in recent decades.

Stereotype ain't fact, pal.

Fact remains that the support of BigBiz follows whoever is in power, regardless of political party.