Why I Parted Ways With The Right

[Oddball]

.....Compromise=defeat....
...There are no politicians today that can reach across the aisle to forge a compromise. If they do, they are severely punished by their party..... A win-win compromise is still looked at as a loss because you allowed the other side to win also.
In the end...the American people lose

Complete hogwash.
First of off, just about any time those overdressed street hoodlums agree on anything, it's we the peeps who end up taking the hit.

Secondly, Juan McSellout is quite possible the biggest squishy, smoke-filled room wheeler-dealer compromiser of the last couple of decades and got rewarded as his party's nominee last time around.

Screw compromise...Gimme that gridlock any day.

 

[rightwinger]

.....Compromise=defeat....
...There are no politicians today that can reach across the aisle to forge a compromise. If they do, they are severely punished by their party..... A win-win compromise is still looked at as a loss because you allowed the other side to win also.
In the end...the American people lose

Complete hogwash.
First of off, just about any time those overdressed street hoodlums agree on anything, it's we the peeps who end up taking the hit.

Secondly, Juan McSellout is quite possible the biggest squishy, smoke-filled room wheeler-dealer compromiser of the last couple of decades and got rewarded as his party's nominee last time around.

Screw compromise...Gimme that gridlock any day.

LOL

You got me sold Dude!

 

[kyzr]

I cannot support a movement that claims to believe in limited government but backed an unlimited domestic and foreign policy presidency that assumed illegal, extra-constitutional dictatorial powers until forced by the system to return to the rule of law.

I'm confused who this one is for. This is for Obama, correct? UHC, etc. If not I need specific examples.

I cannot support a movement that exploded spending and borrowing and blames its successor for the debt.

Obama again, far and away the Debt grower.

I cannot support a movement that so abandoned government's minimal and vital role to police markets and address natural disasters that it gave us Katrina and the financial meltdown of 2008.

Katrina happened because the dems in LA built shitty sea walls and allowed building in flood prone zones (no zoning) then they ignored evacuation warnings. Don't blame anyone for Katrina but the locals.

I cannot support a movement that holds torture as a core value.

Waterboarding is used on US troops as training. In case you don't know what torture is, its what Saddam did to Iraqis, things like cutting off limbs, boiling in oil, painting with acid, electrocuting, hanging from meat hooks, throwing off high roofs, beating bottoms of feet, killing with mustard gas, etc. Your calling waterboarding torture cheapens the term.

I cannot support a movement that holds that purely religious doctrine should govern civil political decisions and that uses the sacredness of religious faith for the pursuit of worldly power.

Fantasy Island. I have no clue what you are talking about. Must be a drug induced stupor.

I cannot support a movement that is deeply homophobic, cynically deploys fear of homosexuals to win votes, and gives off such a racist vibe that its share of the minority vote remains pitiful.

Lets see, the minority votes for minority candidates, and the majority votes for majority candidates...that seems to make sense. So what??

I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.

Howard Dean reference? Pelosi? Not sure what you're talking about.

I cannot support a movement that sees permanent war as compatible with liberal democratic norms and limited government.

Talk to the SNs about this one.

I cannot support a movement that criminalizes private behavior in the war on drugs.

Been to Somalia lately? My job is to ensure that workers are not impaired. Lives depend on it as well as insurance rates, and the company itself. A better question is why do people have substance abuse?

I cannot support a movement that would back a vice-presidential candidate manifestly unqualified and duplicitous because of identity politics and electoral cynicism.

Joe Biden?? Palin ran AK perfectly, balanced budgets, good approval ratings, way better than Obama has.

I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.

Lets see, AIDS for one. I consider them like feces eaters, just deviate behaviors that I don't want my kids to see.

I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.

You're only talking about evangelicals like Huck. Some of your "beliefs" are just as ridiculous.

I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.

You haven't been paying attention lately have you? It is a hoax.

I cannot support a movement that refuses ever to raise taxes, while proposing no meaningful reductions in government spending.

just keep watching Obama. this is exactly what he is doing.

I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.

You'd lose a debate with either. Don't forget laura Ingraham, Bill Oreilly, Ann Coulter, or the converted Geraldo

I cannot support a movement that believes that the United States should be the sole global power, should sustain a permanent war machine to police the entire planet, and sees violence as the core tool for international relations.

You just don't get the self-preservation thing do you? Point of fact I don't want to pay for a global military while the EU sleeps peacefully under the US umbrella. I want the EU to start pulling its own weight.

 

[rightwinger]

I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.
Lets see, AIDS for one. I consider them like feces eaters, just deviate behaviors that I don't want my kids to see.

Thanks kyzr

All I needed to know about your politics

 

[kyzr]

You're welcome.

 

[Toro]

yeah, I agree. The whackjobs on the Right pushed me away too.

Having said that, I woke up this morning and heard Hillary saying that the US would help contribute at least part of $100 billion a year to developing countries for global warming, and thought "I can't believe these guys are that ******* stupid!"

 

[Ringel05]

Interesting piece. I've often thought the 'right' a odd and uncomfortable coalition, but I never expected the nuttiness that calls itself right/conservative today. It is refreshing to see some on the right admitting the wackiness.

Leaving the Right - The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

"It seems to me that now is a critical time for more people whose principles lie broadly on the center-right to do so - against the conservative degeneracy in front of us. Those who have taken such a stand - to one degree or other - demand respect."

Little Green Footballs - Why I Parted Ways With The Right

6. Support for anti-government lunacy (see: tea parties, militias, Fox News, Glenn Beck, etc.)

10. Hatred for President Obama that goes far beyond simply criticizing his policies, into racism, hate speech, and bizarre conspiracy theories (see: witch doctor pictures, tea parties, Birthers, Michelle Malkin, Fox News, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and every other right wing source)

Two are enough, see others in link.

Wow, replace a few names and lunacy aspects and that's the same reason I parted ways with both parties. Uuuummmmmmmmm.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The people are the right are idiots.

They have almost destroyed America.

hey Chris why dont you write a book about it.....you can call it...."How The Right Almost Destroyed America.....And Why I Am To Stupid To See That The Left Is Doing It Also".....you and Midcant.....to Morons who deserve each other....

 

[Harry Dresden]

I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.

I think this is a critical fault with both political parties today. There is no middle ground anymore. Compromise=defeat. Both parties are more concerned with political victories and building political capital than doing what is right for the American people.
There are no politicians today that can reach across the aisle to forge a compromise. If they do, they are severely punished by their party. A win-win compromise is still looked at as a loss because you allowed the other side to win also.
In the end...the American people lose

agree with you on this RW.....

 

[Avatar4321]

The people are the right are idiots.

They have almost destroyed America.

You're right. We left you guys in control. What the heck were we thinking?

 

[Avatar4321]

I cannot support a movement that claims to believe in limited government but backed an unlimited domestic and foreign policy presidency that assumed illegal, extra-constitutional dictatorial powers until forced by the system to return to the rule of law.

But you can support a movment that is quite open about assuming illegal, extxra-constitutional dictatorial powers. That makes so much more sense.

I cannot support a movement that exploded spending and borrowing and blames its successor for the debt.

So you support a movement that wants to spend and borrow more?

I cannot support a movement that so abandoned government's minimal and vital role to police markets and address natural disasters that it gave us Katrina and the financial meltdown of 2008.

But you have no problem supporting a movement that blatantly interfers to cripple the market or designing financial meltdowns to make political gains

I cannot support a movement that holds torture as a core value.

Yet you keep talking.

I cannot support a movement that holds that purely religious doctrine should govern civil political decisions and that uses the sacredness of religious faith for the pursuit of worldly power.

But that's exactly what you are supporting. Use faith to push bigger government, to push health care, to push government welfare. You have no problem with your politicians going from church to church for their power while denouncing others for not doing that.

I cannot support a movement that is deeply homophobic, cynically deploys fear of homosexuals to win votes, and gives off such a racist vibe that its share of the minority vote remains pitiful.

But you support a movement that refuses to actually understand why someone has a certain position but instead seeks to defeat political opponents through name calling, personal attacks, intimidation, and often violence. You try usurp the power of the people to force your own issues against their will.

I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.

So you leave the side that's playing fair? that makes no sense whatsoever.

I cannot support a movement that sees permanent war as compatible with liberal democratic norms and limited government.

But you refuse to understand what war is, see legitimate threats, and do what you can to stop them.

I cannot support a movement that criminalizes private behavior in the war on drugs.

But you can support criminalization of people who differ in ideas. makes so much sense

I cannot support a movement that would back a vice-presidential candidate manifestly unqualified and duplicitous because of identity politics and electoral cynicism.

But you support a movement who elects an even less qualified President?

I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.

Yet you have no problem lying about others

I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.

Yet, you dont know the difference between fact and theory.

I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.

So you have your head in the sand and refuse to actually fix the problems. makes so much sense.

I cannot support a movement that refuses ever to raise taxes, while proposing no meaningful reductions in government spending.

So you support a movement that always raises taxes and increases spending regularly... makes so much sense.

I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.

But you would support a movement that doesnt distance itself from a liar like yourself? how ironic.

I cannot support a movement that believes that the United States should be the sole global power, should sustain a permanent war machine to police the entire planet, and sees violence as the core tool for international relations.

So you support a movement that specifically attempts to destroy the United States. Brilliant move!

 

[Chris]

George Bush and the Republicans almost destroyed America, by deregulating the financial markets and borrowing billions from China to finance a useless war.

 

[garyd]

So when Obama Borrows three times as much spends four times as and guarantees limited job growth for the forseeable future though cap and trade you ***** like hell right?

 

[Chris]

So when Obama Borrows three times as much spends four times as and guarantees limited job growth for the forseeable future though cap and trade you ***** like hell right?

No, I would rather spend money in America than Iraq.

 

[oreo]

George Bush and the Republicans almost destroyed America, by deregulating the financial markets and borrowing billions from China to finance a useless war.

Everyone knows that the financial markets were deregulated during the Clinton administration. There was a great article in the Rolling Stone describing the AIG debacle & the below is now a FAMOUS article.

If there is any American that doesn't understand what happened & when by now, their IQ has got to be below 70. You really don't want to look this stupid.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

The federal government is directly responsible for the current unemployment in this country & millions of Americans losing their homes. They in effect through Fannie/Freddie decided to co-sign our names to 50% of the mortgages in this country--while lowering lending requirements--& using sub-prime mortgages in their "everyone deserves homeownership policy." Wall street bought these mortgage backed securities & then started trading them in the black hole called hedge funds aka derivitives--also known very well in the 1990's. One single woman pointed this out to Allan Greenspan & then treasury secretary Robert Rubin--& they both ran her out of town on a rail. They completely ignored her warnings. Banking boards in the Clinton & Bush administration continued to ignore all the warnings & this all resulted in a collapse of banking--Wall Street & now us--main street.

If you don't understand this by now, you really shouldn't be on any political board.

 

[kyzr]

I could also add that Clinton started the financial crisis by giving mortgages to the unqualified
Progressive Historians: History For Our Future
Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
then Barney Frank and Obama protected their cash cows Fannie/Freddie by stopping GOP attempts at regulation.
Democrats Blocked Financial Reforms that McCain and GOP Proposed in 2005!

There is even a youtube video showing McCain trying to regulate banks, and the dems say "what problem"??

 

[Wry Catcher]

but then again.. you fail to realize that the Left Criticized and made out Bush to be the worst guy ever.. and i mean ever..

George W. Bush had eight whole years - during that time we were attacked, and he then attacked the wrong nation allowing OBL to hide - he lowered taxes, going from surplus to deficit, he embarrassed the nation constantly, Katrina was a disaster. I cannot think of a positive unless constant vacationing is presidential. So after three or four years you can review Obama, right now it is the same idiocy that greeted Clinton when he won. Seems the 'right' can yell and scream, but in power only fail.

And there it is folks, another Liberal who Recited the Media.

Since when is Lowering taxes a bad thing? oh wait.. that's right people prefer The Government taking the money instead of the person who rightfully earned it to spend it how they please.

1. Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history.
2. Supports permanent elimination of the death tax.
3. Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and deeply shocked as a result of the 9/11 attacks.
4. Is seeking legislation to amend the Constitution to give the president line-item veto authority.
5. In process of permanently eliminating IRS marriage penalty.
6. Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people.
7. Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts.
8. Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules would have shut down every home business in America.
9. Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.
10. Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains.
11. Signed trade promotion authority.
12. Reduced and is working to ultimately eliminate the estate tax for family farms and ranches.
13. Fight Europe's ban on importing biotech crops from the United States.
14. Exempt food from unilateral trade sanctions and embargoes.
15. Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home.
16. Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled.
17. Increased the annual contribution limit on Education IRA's from $500 to $2,000 per child.
18. Make permanent the $5,000 adoption tax credit and provide $1 billion over five years to increase the credit to $10,000.
19. Grant a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans.

Clinton surplus
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).

While not defending the increase of the federal debt under President Bush, it's curious to see Clinton's record promoted as having generated a surplus. It never happened. There was never a surplus and the facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion.

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:

Nice job Clancy, have you ever considered working for the Ministry of Truth? Lies of omission and lies of commission are lies; remember, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics" (Mark Twain).

 

[Wry Catcher]

George Bush and the Republicans almost destroyed America, by deregulating the financial markets and borrowing billions from China to finance a useless war.

Everyone knows that the financial markets were deregulated during the Clinton administration. There was a great article in the Rolling Stone describing the AIG debacle & the below is now a FAMOUS article.

If there is any American that doesn't understand what happened & when by now, their IQ has got to be below 70. You really don't want to look this stupid.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

The federal government is directly responsible for the current unemployment in this country & millions of Americans losing their homes. They in effect through Fannie/Freddie decided to co-sign our names to 50% of the mortgages in this country--while lowering lending requirements--& using sub-prime mortgages in their "everyone deserves homeownership policy." Wall street bought these mortgage backed securities & then started trading them in the black hole called hedge funds aka derivitives--also known very well in the 1990's. One single woman pointed this out to Allan Greenspan & then treasury secretary Robert Rubin--& they both ran her out of town on a rail. They completely ignored her warnings. Banking boards in the Clinton & Bush administration continued to ignore all the warnings & this all resulted in a collapse of banking--Wall Street & now us--main street.

If you don't understand this by now, you really shouldn't be on any political board.

Ah, if this is all true, why didn't Bush and Cheney fix the problem? In 2000, immediately after the Supreme Injustice gave them the White House, president 'elect' Bush & VP 'elect' Cheney walked hand in hand (almost) to the podium and gave a press conference. In that press conference they blamed the Clinton Administration for a recession, causing fear in the population, which exacerbated an economic slowdown.
Of course they did so to justify a large tax cut, which benefited the few (never did trickle down) and not the many. But, I digress.
If Bush/Cheney didn't fix what they alleged Clinton broke, why the **** are they given a pass? That had 8 years and managed to really FU not only our economy, but further divided the nation (something the former VP continues to do for self serving purpose).

 

[AVG-JOE]

Why I Parted Ways With The Right

The Right has been neutered so you needn't concern yourself with them. Now Americans have to come to grips with the fascist liberals that are in power, but they still have a huge cult following. They will be America's downfall if Americans don't wake up soon.

I disagree. The downfall of America is being fomented and hastened by greed and a sense of entitlement by both the wealthy and the poor.

If the productive middle ever decides that what it ends up with at the end of the work week is simply not worth the effort and quits.....​

 

[AVG-JOE]

Curious how no one on the right can seriously address the issues raised by Sullivan and Charles Johnson? What does that say about the right given Sullivan's influence.

"Charles Johnson is absolutely right in my view to get off that wagon for the reasons [he] has stated. Read his testament. It is full of emotion, but also of honesty." AS

What's the point in critiquing a couple of drips, whose lists are largely ad hominem stereotypes and apparently completely ignore that much of the same behavior is being exhibited by the left?

The point would be to educate the moderates as to why being on the 'right' side of the aisle has value, even if one is not a bible thumping, turn the clock back to 1957 wing-nut, which is how many moderates see the republican party today.

Instead of YAAAAAAWWWWWNNNNN...

Perhaps an eloquent explanation of why you have not parted ways with the right would do service to your cause.

Right now, this average Joe is bitterly disappointed and disgusted with ALL of Americas elected power.