• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Random Political Thoughts

Started by MV/Liberace!, February 08, 2012, 10:50:42 AM

ItsOver

All this wiener talk is making me hungry.  I like mine split, grilled, served on a nicely grilled New England-style split top roll, with mustard, relish, and onions.








Quote from: West of the Rockies on May 23, 2013, 05:12:42 PM
And Weiner is remarkably different from South Carolina politician Mark Sanford exactly how?...


Oh, he's not.  Heh, didn't we rake him over the coals last week?

And fortunately or unfortunately, the parties don't really have a say as to who can enter a race.  Which is how the R's ended up with David Duke as 'their' candidate for gov in Louisiana 15 or 20 years ago.

For some reason, I'm thinking this current IRS scandal links directly back to Big Sis and others at the top. Why else would that dude be in OKC? Are tornadoes now terrorists? Assault tornadoes?

Quote from: Paper*Boy on May 23, 2013, 10:28:45 AM
Why is Anthony Weiner running for Mayor of New York?
Fuck that mfer.

MV/Liberace!

a random political thought...


i think george w. bush did more damage to the republican party than any democrat could ever DREAM of doing.  he grew the size of government, spent more, passed constitutionally questionable legislation in the name of safety, entered us into wars that were, in retrospect, not a good bet... the list goes on. 


even with all of that taken into account, i have to say, i admire the guy in certain ways.  the things he said leading up to the iraq war might have been wrong, but i don't think he knew he was wrong.  i don't think he ever deliberately lied to anyone about anything.  there's a big difference between being wrong and lying. 


also, and most importantly, i think he genuinely believes the united states to be the greatest country on earth, and that's exactly what an american president should believe.  it's quite the contrast to what we have now.  bush hoped to live up to the expectations placed upon him by the office and its legacy.  obama sees the office simply as the vessel through which he can correct the numerous injustices perpetrated by an imperialistic, capitalist gang bang of which we're all shamefully a part.

So now Pelosi is blaming the IRS scandal on... Bush.  Geez, here I thought having become a laughingstock blaming everything little thing on Bush all these years that they'd finally stopped.  I guess that news hadn't found it's way under Nancy's rock yet.

Axelrod is blaming the Washington State bridge collapse on the R's of course.  Despite hundreds of millions in stimulus money going to infrastructure (much of which was wasted) and despite Washington State being one of the Banana Republic One Party Democrat states and not taking care of their own damn roads and bridges.



I guess the surprise is that the White House heard about the bridge so quickly.  They still don't seem to know a thing about Benghazi, the IRS abuses of power, or tapping the phone lines of the press.  This whole incompetent corrupt gang should resign en masse.


Sardondi

Quote from: MV on May 24, 2013, 04:30:55 PM
a random political thought...
i think george w. bush did more damage to the republican party than any democrat could ever DREAM of doing.  he grew the size of government, spent more, passed constitutionally questionable legislation in the name of safety, entered us into wars that were, in retrospect, not a good bet... the list goes on....
Absolutely correct. For all his aw shucks good ol' boyishness (and I think personally he was one of the most decent and genuinely humble men who have ever been president), Bush followed his father as the very epitome of an Eastern Establishment Republican who held Reagan, his principles and supporters in disdain. Obama would never have been possible without Bush...and the profligate, spendthrift Republican Congress. From 2000-2008, except for social issues like gay marriage, there was really very little difference between Republican and Democrat legislative policies.   

Quote from: Sardondi on May 24, 2013, 09:22:30 PM
From 2000-2008, except for social issues like gay marriage, there was really very little difference between Republican and Democrat legislative policies.
Add foreign policy that list, and you are bang on.


Sardondi

Quote from: RealCool Daddio on May 24, 2013, 10:20:59 PM
Add foreign policy that list, and you are bang on.
You're correct.

Sardondi

Yeah, why is that? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/27/why-are-liberals-rude-to-republicans?CMP=twt_gu

Note this article is from The Guardian, which is the British newspaper equivalent to, oh, Mother Jones. Interesting that it's a left-leaning publication which addresses a phenomenon that is so longstanding and regular that it's hardly even commented on by conservatives these days. It's like complaining about the weather: why bother, because that's just the way it is. Or rather, that's just the way they are. Which in a different time would have made folks ashamed to the point they would take it as a point of honor to ensure they never acted so themselves; and would try to persuade other tribe members to behave likewise. But then that was before the days when Saul Alinsky became the American left's lodestar.

__________________________________________________________________________________
And on another note, a Dem. congressman's chief of staff resigns in a scandal around his attempts to submit hundreds of fraudulent absentee ballots in the last election. http://thehill.com/homenews/house/302915-freshman-representatives-chief-of-staff-resigns-amid-investigation Ballot fraud? It doesn't exist! I know a game: let's add up all the known incidents of use of fraudulent absentee ballots, and see what party is involved. How about that? Okay? Uh, hello?....

All liberals are terrible, horrible, mean people!  They are rude, unkind, and they smell bad.  Republicans are always polite, honest, sweet, and kind!  Only the DemonRats ever cheat!  Republicans are just doing what they can in a totally rigged system.  The media always leans left -- even Fox News clearly favors the friggin' leftist/socialist/Muslim/atheist/fascist/NWO of OBummer.  We all know that! 




Sardondi

Quote from: West of the Rockies on June 02, 2013, 04:41:33 PM
All liberals are terrible, horrible, mean people!  They are rude, unkind, and they smell bad.  Republicans are always polite, honest, sweet, and kind!  Only the DemonRats ever cheat!  Republicans are just doing what they can in a totally rigged system.  The media always leans left -- even Fox News clearly favors the friggin' leftist/socialist/Muslim/atheist/fascist/NWO of OBummer.  We all know that!
That's a perfectly fair and reasonable rendition of what both the article and I said. And so deftly, deftly done.

onan

I really hate this kind of journalism. It is cheap and does nothing to further rational discourse. I can relate the same stories in reverse; sometimes being the only liberal at a dinner party.


As to why liberals are rude to republicans? well the easy answer is because they often deserve it. But the more rational answer is because it is a two way street. And always has been.


At least we aren't Preston Brooks and Charles Sumner... then again, maybe that behavior might give more pause than a verbal insult.




Quote from: West of the Rockies on June 02, 2013, 04:41:33 PM
All liberals are terrible, horrible, mean people!  They are rude, unkind, and they smell bad.  Republicans are always polite, honest, sweet, and kind!  Only the DemonRats ever cheat!  Republicans are just doing what they can in a totally rigged system.  The media always leans left -- even Fox News clearly favors the friggin' leftist/socialist/Muslim/atheist/fascist/NWO of OBummer.  We all know that!


Do you recall the period roughly 1980-2008 when any disagreement with Democrat policy, anytime Democrat appointees were opposed, anyone supporting policy or appointees Democrats disagreed with always - always - boiled down to 'racism'?

Go read Alinsky's Rules For Radicals, or just flip through it.  Understand that was written specifically for the Lib/Left/Progressive as the way to operate politically here in the US.  Look back over the several decades since it was written and recall how things played out.  The Lib/Left absolutely IS responsible for the current level of discourse.

The Libs claim to be compassionate, enlightened, tolerant, open minded, and all the rest - until someone disagrees with them that is.  It's pretty amazing how quickly they become so aggressively ugly and nasty.

And self righteous.  It seems clear they somehow think they are better than everyone else, are right while everyone else is not just wrong - but evil - and are thus entitled, if not required, to act that way.  Look at the treatment of someone like, say Sarah Palin and her family.  Look at how Occupy operates, how the 'demonstrations' going back to the 80s always are conducted.  Some of the outrageous comments made by Democrat Congressmen and Senators.  You can look long and far and not see hate and bile like that.  Look how everyone they hate and fear the most (successful Conservatives, or - gasp! - a woman or minority that dares identify with Conservative ideas) is treated.


With the election of Obama, what we Conservatives knew collectively would just be more of the same - only amped up higher than ever, I think people just decided to speak out and let the smug Lib elite say whatever they wanted, instead of always shrinking from their insults. 

   

So now, 5 years later, 5 years of finally saying 'enough' and giving it right back to them - using some of their same Alinsky tactics against them - now it's how 'mean' those right wingers are.  It seems to me the only way back to civil discourse  is for them to decide maybe this isn't the best way to operate after getting a taste of it themselves.


Do you recall the period roughly 1980-2013 when any disagreement with Republican policy, anytime Republican appointees were opposed, anyone supporting policy or appointees Republicans disagreed with always - always - boiled down to 'socialism'?

Go read anything by Ann Coulter,listen to Rush Limbaugh, or just watch Fox News.  Understand these are prodeced specifically for the Neo-con/GOP/fascist set as the way to operate politically here in the US.  Look back over the several decades since the right wing takeover of media and recall how things played out.  The Extreme Right absolutely IS responsible for the current level of discourse.

The Republicans claim to be compassionate, enlightened, tolerant, open minded, to have a large tent, and all the rest - until someone disagrees with them that is.  It's pretty amazing how quickly they become so aggressively ugly and nasty.

And self righteous.  It seems clear they somehow think they are better than everyone else, that they have God on their side, are right while everyone else is not just wrong - but evil - and are thus entitled, if not required, to act that way.  Look at the treatment of someone like, say Hilary Clinton and her family.  Look at how The Tea Part operates, how their 'demonstrations' are always are conducted.  Some of the outrageous comments made by Republican Congressmen and Senators.  You can look long and far and not see hate and bile like that.  Look how everyone they hate and fear the most (successful Liberals , or - gasp! - a woman or minority that dares run for president) is treated.


With the election of Obama, what we Liberals knew collectively would just be more of the same - only amped up higher than ever, I think people just decided to speak out and let the smug Neo con elite say whatever they wanted, instead of always shrinking from their insults. 

   

So now, 5 years later, 5 years of finally saying 'enough' and giving it right back to them - using some of their same Nixonian tactics against them - now it's how 'corrupt' those left wingers are.  It seems to me the only way back to civil discourse  is for them to decide maybe this isn't the best way to operate after again losing the election.


Eddie Coyle


      This would fall under the category of Things That Annoy...but since it's of a political nature I'll keep it here.

        But isn't anybody a little irked that Obama's kids will get Affirmative Action points, but...say a coalminer's kid won't. Well, fuck it...MY KID can't. Wonderful system.

       

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on June 06, 2013, 12:33:06 AM
      This would fall under the category of Things That Annoy...but since it's of a political nature I'll keep it here.

        But isn't anybody a little irked that Obama's kids will get Affirmative Action points, but...say a coalminer's kid won't. Well, fuck it...MY KID can't. Wonderful system.

     

Well, they ARE blacker than Obama. The fact libs defend AA is hilarious. How is AA ok and Jim Crow not? Seriously? It's the SAME THING. All you have to do is couch Jim Crow in positive affirmations for whites instead of negatives toward blacks (ie. this water fountain is addressing historic inequities...), and you have AA.

Well, Jackpine, Jim Crow laws were created specifically to negatively impact a certain group of people.  AA was created with the idea of correcting historical wrongs/damage done to a group of people to bring them up to something of an even playing field. 

Now, whether that goal was effectively met is another thing; whether AA should continue in its current form is also worth discussing.  It does seem ridiculous that the Obama girls would be awarded extra points for (for instance) college entrance or a job application.  But let's be honest, in this particular case, it's a moot point -- those girls are internationally famous.  They come from prestige and power and will not need AA to open ANY doors for them.

If you are the children of powerful parents, you can get out of the military with deferrments, you can get into colleges where by all rights you shouldn't even dare send in an application.  Loads of doors are perpetually open for the children of famous sires.

Juan

Quote from: West of the Rockies on June 06, 2013, 11:25:24 AM
Well, Jackpine, Jim Crow laws were created specifically to negatively impact a certain group of people.  AA was created with the idea of correcting historical wrongs/damage done to a group of people to bring them up to something of an even playing field. 
Bullshit.  Both were created for exactly the same reason - to elect Democrats.  Despite the attempt to portray southern segregationists as switching to the Republican party, with the sole exception of Strom Thurmond, they remained loyal Democrats to the ends of their lives. And loyal New Dealers, too.   They set up the voting laws to insure votes for the Democrat power structure.  In my small city, they did not discourage the black vote, they bought it by paying off the black power structure.  Segregated polling places insured that the white leaders would know if the black leaders delivered. 

By the mid-60s, when the WWII generation was coming to political power - and, in the south were largely fed up with the segregationists - and as segregation laws were being found unconstitutional, the federal government came up with AA in order to buy the black vote.

West, you seem like a nice person, which is why, I guess, you could be fooled into thinking the politicians actually cared about black people.

Lunger

Quote from: UFO Fill on June 06, 2013, 01:18:23 PM
... fooled into thinking the politicians actually cared about black people.

LOL! Aint that the truth

Quote from: UFO Fill on June 06, 2013, 01:18:23 PM
... West, you seem like a nice person, which is why, I guess, you could be fooled into thinking the politicians actually cared about black people.


One need look no further than big cities run by black Libs for the past 40 years.  They have all of it - city govt, courts, schools, police, the power to tax and regulate.   They've had time to realize their policies have failed and try other policies, but they don't.  How are things going there - education?, crime?, jobs?, poverty?, opportunity?  One thing sure, the same political machines always - always - remain in power

Another 36 people shot in Chicago over the weekend.

Yes, Obama and the other Chicago politicians are just the people we should look to for gun policy that works.

onan

Quote from: Paper*Boy on June 17, 2013, 05:18:30 AM
Another 36 people shot in Chicago over the weekend.

Yes, Obama and the other Chicago politicians are just the people we should look to for gun policy that works.


The chicago scenario as most of us are aware, like other metropolitan areas, has more violence than most areas. And guns are part of the problem, but not the primary problem.


We should look at gun control and see that to some extent it is a logical approach to help in violent crimes. But to think gun control alone is the answer to this kind of violence... well it is just the unoriginal type of thinking I have gotten used to from politicians for the last >35 years.

ItsOver

Quote from: Paper*Boy on June 17, 2013, 05:18:30 AM
Another 36 people shot in Chicago over the weekend.

Yes, Obama and the other Chicago politicians are just the people we should look to for gun policy that works.


Don't forget the other liberal utopia known as Detroit.  Such a marvelous economic success story.  ;)

Sardondi

Quote from: onan on June 17, 2013, 05:39:57 AM

The chicago scenario as most of us are aware, like other metropolitan areas, has more violence than most areas. And guns are part of the problem, but not the primary problem.


We should look at gun control and see that to some extent it is a logical approach to help in violent crimes. But to think gun control alone is the answer to this kind of violence... well it is just the unoriginal type of thinking I have gotten used to from politicians for the last >35 years.
The real reason for violence in Chicago has virtually nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with the elephant in the room. Anyone want to venture a guess as to the race of the significant majority of shooters and victims? Because the problem is a failed society, not a couple of pounds of steel and plastic.

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Sardondi on June 17, 2013, 10:27:47 AM
The real reason for violence in Chicago has virtually nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with the elephant in the room. Anyone want to venture a guess as to the race of the significant majority of shooters and victims? Because the problem is a failed society, not a couple of pounds of steel and plastic.
While George Zimmerman is a household name, the Chicago murderers will remain anonymous. As "the community" continues to complain about "babies being killed", but when it's time to make an arrest..."our babies are being incarcerated"

         You can't win. So I don't play. And Zimmerman obviously defines "man bites dog" story, hence the absurd media coverage.

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on June 17, 2013, 10:47:51 AM
         While George Zimmerman is a household name, the Chicago murderers will remain anonymous. As "the community" continues to complain about "babies being killed", but when it's time to make an arrest..."our babies are being incarcerated"

         You can't win. So I don't play. And Zimmerman obviously defines "man bites dog" story, hence the absurd media coverage.


No snitchin'

analog kid

Quote from: Sardondi on June 17, 2013, 10:27:47 AM
The real reason for violence in Chicago has virtually nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with the elephant in the room. Anyone want to venture a guess as to the race of the significant majority of shooters and victims? Because the problem is a failed society, not a couple of pounds of steel and plastic.

The problem is religious extremism IMO. But that just underlies the failings of humanity, I guess, when you can take functioning democracies and plunge then into the dark ages with nothing more than poetic word salad. I don't think that's something that's fixable.

Juan

Quote from: analog kid on June 17, 2013, 11:57:51 AM
The problem is religious extremism IMO.
This is a take I haven't heard before.  I'd like to see you expand on this idea.

Sardondi

Quote from: analog kid on June 17, 2013, 11:57:51 AM
The problem is religious extremism IMO. But that just underlies the failings of humanity, I guess, when you can take functioning democracies and plunge then into the dark ages with nothing more than poetic word salad. I don't think that's something that's fixable.
Huh?

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod