Republicans Are The Problem

I just thought it was funny instead of addressing what the CENTRIST had to say you went about showing us how entirely fit he is in resume to make a credible statement on the topic. I mean...that's funny.

 

Congratulations on making a completely meaningless response composed of a half-baked psychoanalysis riddled with ignorance. i'm not sure what part of my post gave you the impression that I cared at all for what you think I am/were, but you should probably have saved yourself the time....cause I don't.

 

Yeah, that liberty and freedom crap is so over rated. While you are at it, why don't you come over and landscape my yard, clean my house, and wash my car, but don't expect to be able to keep any of your earnings from it. That would be unfair to someone that didn't work.

 

No I'm not saying we should all be nice to each other. I am saying we should be honest in what we say. I am saying if our side does something wrong, acknowledge it. Tell them it's not right and you don't condone it. If we let them do anything they want and never complain, they aren't about to change.

When you complain about the other side, be sure what your saying is true. Don't condemn it just to bad mouth it. When you do that you lose all credibility. People really aren't listening to what you say because they know everything you say about the other side is bad, true or not.

I have condemned Obama a lot. But I have never called him names just to bad mouth him. I have never said anything about him or Liberals that I felt in my heart wasn't true. I have no trouble condemning Republicans either when they do something I don't agree with. Hell Most Republicans thought I was a Liberal when I argued for days with them about GM and Chrysler. Even told them I was ashamed of them on how they were acting. We need to knock off the name calling and stick to facts.

 

Easy ... you didn't mention Clinton ... who's economic (bi-partisan) plan(s) were to remain in place and eliminate our National Debt in 10 years ...

No right-winger ever or will ever mention this ...

 

What do you call socialist/commies? I've not seen any of them in the parliament in USA.

Well, maybe during the period of Whigs and the beginning of the Republican Party there were Socialists in that party, but this ended long time ago.

 

So I have to mention Clinton in any opinion I make about the need for government reform?

Do yourself a favor and take a step back. Your rabid ideological bent is making you irrational.

 

I read the entire artical and concure, the republicen party has lost sight of what it was bult upon and has become a unified front against progress, only the fact that they are more unified than the dem pary keeps them from obscurity.

 

This was a good question and I wonder why no research was done on their backgrounds.

Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein are both political analysist with extensive credentials and work with non-partisan think tanks. Mann has a background as a Democrat and Orenstein defines himself as a centralist.

That doesn't mean their analysis of the current Republican Party is wrong and, in fact, there is a lot of supporting evidence that they are merely addressing that which is obvious to virtually everyone but Republicans. Of course they're also authored some scathing articles on Democrats as well.

If we want to address the real cause of the woes in American today blame can certainly be laid at the feet of both Republican and Democratic politicans as they are both equally responsible for the slow destruction of America.

 

Boston-MA:

The question before the forum is: "Why do you believe the authors are republicans?"
.......

What you gave in reply was a full-blown resume' of both Mann and Ornstein.

What Toddw was asking was in parenthesis: ie: (former?). You just wasted bandwidth on something entirely different in order to evade the issue.

 

The article is an "opinion" piece. Now you are claiming that we should debate how "credible" someone is to provide an opinion? That is funny.

When you and the OP are prepared to retract the original premise of the thread and admit that it was a blatant misrepresentation, then I would be happy to share my opinions on the subject.

 

Neither republicans, no democrats are the problem in and of themselves. There are good people in both parties. The problem is extremists. Far lefters and far righters are both equally evil and corrupt. If you want real change, vote for moderates.

 

Thank you for accurately portraying the background of the authors. And, I agree, the problem is less about far left or far right ideologies and more about how the current government refuses to change its current "business as usual". Fundamental change requires an understanding of the need for change.

 

MMM, as someone leftist. I've seen until now an USA governed by center-right governments to right government, but never I've seen for example a leftist government neither influence of leftist people in the government, so I cannot understand how you can blame the leftists.

The problem are the parties, and the system. And, the best is that the moderates are the most status-quo, for something are moderates. So I don't understand how do you pretend a change with the ones that are better with the actual system.

Ah, and centrists don't exist. That is a lie, and many times the centrists are the worst, extreme centrism we call it in Spain, or also fascism.

 

Can I post your opinions on this forum under the title "Agent_286 - Republican (former?)"? It implies you ARE or WERE a Republican. How about quoting Obama, claiming that Obama is a Republican (former?)?

This is a fundamental misrepresentation. Why do some posters feel compelled to defend their ideology (or defend other posters with similar ideology), rather than simply stating the truth, it was a misstatement.

 

This is the heart of the matter. The same could be said of their followers.

 

Because it would be a falsehood. The dotcom bubble burst and all that "planning" went out the window.

 

......

Wrong: The republicans plotted how they would execute the strategy of keeping Obama at a one-term president since his inauguration in January 2009. Congress has obstructed every single issue brought by the Democrats to get us out of the Bush-induced recession, causing it to be prolonged and painful for the remnants of the middleclass. The republicans have attempted to 'starve' the American workforce by not creating jobs, BUT still collecting the Bush Tax Cuts.

The republcans in Congress have been solely responsible for prolonging the Bush Recession to suit their strategy to get rid of Obama, without any thought of the suffering of the American people. As a result of this, Congressional popularity is now in the single digits...09%...which will be rectified in the November elections.

They have scandalized the nation with their unprofessional biased antics such as the obstruction oif any Obama bills, walkouts, filibusters, fake press conferences pushing their lies and innuendoes on the public which has caused Congress to be unworkable, and the very real danger of a government close-down thru use of hostage taking, and fruitless passing of bills that are sure to be DOA when going to the Senate.

In any other era, the republican agenda would have been considered high treason and it has earned the earned the scorn, hatred, and a backlash that will reach the size of a tsunami in November.

The republicans have no chance to win in November with the nomination of Mitt Romney, a flip-flopper of the first degree. He has no credibility, he lies, lashes out at the poor and disabled, his whole career was as a corporate-raider where he made his billions. He has no real allies except his LDS Mormon Chrch, his family and the Bain Capital where he stashes alot of his wealth from the government.....and he is wanting to the president? (Mirth)

 

So, adding 1.5 trillion to the debt every year is failure in your eyes? What would be better in your view, 2 trillion, 3 trillion?

 

I'd say that you summed-up reality very nicely.

 

From Lyndon Johnson to Bill Clinton, Democrats controlled Congress and are equally responsible for massive debt spending as Congress and the President controls every aspect of expenditure/entitlement spending. According to CBO projections, before Obama’s stimulus became law in 2009, federal debt equaled 36 percent of GDP and was projected to decline slightly over the next few years. Instead, thanks in large part to the Obama stimulus, debt reached 62 percent of GDP by 2010. Debt toppled over 70 percent of GDP in fiscal year 2011, the highest percentage since World War II. Obama is partially to blame for doubling the U.S. GDP debt. Barrack Hussein Obama, an incompetent President with invidious and enigmatic acquaintances who manipulated millions of Americans based on asinine promises of hope, change and transparency. He is nothing more than a self loathing progressive Left elitist, equipped with no moral compass. Ostensibly, minimal effort is being made to balance the Federal budget, reduce expenditure spending by President Obama and The Senate Democrats. Americans are cretins if they believe that the President and Congress will genuinely authorize reducing expenditure spending before addressing taxation which ultimately is dismantling the American economy.

How about some dollars and sense?

First 3 years of President Obama:

2011--------$3,818.8T---$1,645.1T
2010--------$3,456.2T---$1,293.5T
2009--------$3,517.7T---$1,412.7T
total--------$10,793.T---$4,351.3 trillion in the hole.


Last 3 years of Bush:
2008--------$2,982.5T---$0,458.6 billion
2OO7--------$2,728.9T---$0,161.0B
2006--------$2,655.4T---$0,248.6B
total--------$8,367.8T---$0,868.2 billion

 

......

1) You could, but then you would hear from my attorney, because calling me a former republican is surefire slander, plus plagiarism is a serious no-no.

2) Why do you question others defending a person they agree with? That is Debate 101, after all. That is why we are all here.

You are trying to evade the issue of answering the title of the thread, which is: "Republicans Are The Problem"...which we all know is the truth. You can no longer camouflage the truth...republicans have to go...we have a government to run and will not be harassed, blackmailed, threatened, or coerced by any far right agenda.

 

.....

You fail to say that Obama inherited a national debt of over $11 TRILLION dollars from his predecessor GW Bush when Obama stepped into the White House, plus the Bush bailout of Wall Street, leaving Obama to finish the jobs Bush couldn't do.

As late as 2010, the major recipients of a colossal "earmark entitlements" went to the greedy republicans in the midst of their purported republican agenda promoting austerity in government.

President Obama offered government cuts up to $2.6 trillion dollars which Boehner turned down and then caved and settled for half the amount...Ha...

The failure has been the republican far right agenda of getting rid of Obama to the exclusion of actual legislating for the people, which is going to boomerang right in your faces come November....and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

Too much infighting is never good if you want immediate success.

 

So, you would suggest that the authors could sue the OP for slander? I wouldn't go that far, but at least you are agreeing with the entire premise of my response, that it was a blatant misrepresentation.

As for the rest of your dribble, based on your earlier response - calling Bain Capital a "corporate raider", it is apparent that you do not understand business and therefore the real world.

Lastly, the article is an opinion piece from 2 authors (with a fundamentally different opinion on conservatism), blaming conservative politicians for all of the problems in government. I don't have a problem with people expressing their opinion (whether I think it is wrong or right), I do have a problem with misrepresenting truth, as you agreed with.

 

REDRUM:

I am requesting credible links for all of your statements. I will wait for them.
Thanking you, Agent>286