55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 12:00 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
They did not steal it!


No, they just manipulated a corrupt system for their personal gain. They didn't steal it; but they aren't morally upstanding folks, either. Greed runs their lives.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 12:23 pm
For those who claim that the Republicans have not been unduly obstructionist in this congressional session, I submit the following:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/50282-1.html?type=printer_friendly

Cycloptichorn
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 01:24 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:



They did not steal it!



You might want to keep that statement for every time you claim taxes are stealing. Just repeat it every time you feel a desire to claim taxation is theft because the only accurate description under the US constitution is that taxation is NOT theft.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 01:28 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Define "unduly obstructionist".

Attempting to defeat, delay or limit what one regards as harmful or destructive legislation may be termed obstructionism, but it isn't bad or undemocratic. In the case at hand, both parties have lately exhibited the inclination to control the short-term agendas, including what bills will and will not be put to a vote, of both House and Senate to further their partisan objectives.

I believe you would be very hard put trying to defend the real results of Nancy Pelosi's promise to "drain the swamp" of Congressional cronyism, self-aggrandizement, misuse of earmarks, and deal-making in furtherance of their political agendas.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 01:35 pm
@plainoldme,
You're not listening!

Leftist liberals seek to secure their right to steal wealth others earn.
Rightist liberals seek to secure their right to retain wealth they earn.

parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 01:37 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
I believe you would be very hard put trying to defend the real results of Nancy Pelosi's promise to "drain the swamp" of Congressional cronyism, self-aggrandizement, misuse of earmarks, and deal-making in furtherance of their political agendas.

I don't know about that....
Let's look at earmarks which exceeded 13,000 in 2007.

March 2010
Quote:
House Democratic leaders on Wednesday banned budget earmarks to private industry, ending a practice that has steered billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to companies and set off corruption scandals.

The ban is the most forceful step yet in a three-year effort in Congress to curb abuses in the use of earmarks, which allow individual lawmakers to award financing for pet projects to groups and businesses, many of them campaign donors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/us/politics/11earmark.html?_r=1&hp

1000 fewer earmarks in 2009

I would say there has been clear progress on reducing earmarks.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 02:13 pm
@parados,
Nonsense. They are just making (rather late in the day) a virtue out of piously "denying themselves " the misue of earmarks to reward their political foes and the scapegoats they use for their own political ends. However, when it comes to misusing public funds to reward their political supporters they are every bit as eager to continue the venality. They have merely added another layer of hypocrisy to the pile of horeseshit they have made with the flagrant payoffs for votes for their favored legislation; misuse of government authority to reward and payoff labor unions; and coverups for the misbehavior of the untouchable but corrupt icons of the "Black" caucus.

A limp argument - even for you.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 02:26 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Define "unduly obstructionist".


Filibustering ALL legislation. Did you even read the link? That is what DeMint is saying he is going to do: he is going to end all business in the Senate until the new bunch is sworn in in Jan.

If you don't believe that's unduly obstructionist - that this is so far outside the bounds of both normal Senate procedure and the way the founders meant the Senate to work - why should anyone even bother talking about anything with you having to do with the Senate? You clearly are more interested in forwarding your ideological points than you are examining the history of the Senate. No Democrat has ever historically threatened to do this, in the history of the Senate. Even bills with Unanimous consent from both parties will not go through! This is the definition of unduly obstructionist.

Do you even believe it's possible to be too obstructionist, George? If this doesn't do it for you I believe that nothing would. I think your viewpoint is a great example of the destructive anti-government agenda displayed by the right wing in America: you continually and constantly disparage the institution of our government and claim that they cannot possibly accomplish positive goals for Americans. This is simply a false belief on your part and marks you as more of a cranky old man than a dispassionate observer.

Quote:

I believe you would be very hard put trying to defend the real results of Nancy Pelosi's promise to "drain the swamp" of Congressional cronyism, self-aggrandizement, misuse of earmarks, and deal-making in furtherance of their political agendas.


I don't think I would, actually. Why don't you try me?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 02:40 pm
@ican711nm,
You are doing well, Massagato with all the spam.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 03:08 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Nonsense. They are just making (rather late in the day) a virtue out of piously "denying themselves " the misue of earmarks to reward their political foes and the scapegoats they use for their own political ends.


I guess it's nonsense if you want to deny that the use of earmarks has dropped from 13,997 in 2007 to 8,000.

It's also nonsense if you want to deny this
http://www.washingtonwatch.com/blog/2009/04/12/catalogue-of-fy-2010-earmarks/
Quote:
In March, the House Appropriations Committee announced reforms to the earmark process, which members of Congress use to designate federal funds for projects in their districts.

The reform requires members to post their earmark requests online, including the proposed recipient, the address of the recipient, the amount of the request, and an explanation of the purpose of the earmark and why it is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds. The Senate has done the same.



Quote:
. However, when it comes to misusing public funds to reward their political supporters they are every bit as eager to continue the venality. They have merely added another layer of hypocrisy to the pile of horeseshit they have made with the flagrant payoffs for votes for their favored legislation; misuse of government authority to reward and payoff labor unions; and coverups for the misbehavior of the untouchable but corrupt icons of the "Black" caucus.
Could you provide support for your statement using the list of earmarks I just linked to? Or is this just rhetoric from you that you really have no interest in whether it is actually true or not?
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 04:12 pm
I plead with all here to read "Animal Colony, a cautionary tale for today," (177 pages) by Thomas Allen Rexroth & Mark Andrew Olsen.

Quote:

............................................Dedication

............................This book is dedicated to all our
.........................children and grandchildren. May they
.......................have the same or better opportunities to
.........................have a happy and prosperous life than
...........................we did. May we pass on to them a
...............................country worthy of sacrifice.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Sep, 2010 05:31 pm
@ican711nm,
Massagato you are spam master.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 09:39 am
Conservatism seems to be a self-correcting problem. According to the latest statistics, conservatives deserve a collective Darwin Award for knocking themselves out of the gene pool.
Quote:

Past bragging rights, the ramifications are deadly: There were more than 30,000 fatal crashes in the U.S. last year, including more than 5,000 deaths just from “distracted driving,” such as cellphone use, according to data released last week. In trying to get some definitive answers, The Daily Beast used crash data—because accidents provide an objective way to define someone as a bad driver, or not—and focused on fatal crashes, using the most recent available data (2009) since those are uniformly reported state-by-state. From there, we specifically measured fatal crashes where driver mistake was a key factor: DUI, blowing through stop signs, careless or inattentive driving and the like.

What was more surprising: how the breakdown between states with more dangerous drivers and safer drivers fell almost completely along the lines of the 2008 McCain-Obama election, with the Republicans again coming up on the short end. Nine of the 10 worst-performing states went for McCain, while nine of the 10 best performers voted for Obama


Keep rackin' up those miles, ican & okie, we'll be sure to steer WAY clear of you on the road.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-28/worst-drivers-in-america-which-state-has-the-most-accidents/

Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 09:48 am
Not unduly Obstructionist?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_09/025900.php

DeMint and Coburn block creation of Women's History Museum, a revenue-neutral project (it would be paid for by selling off a little unused Federal land), simply because they don't want a single further thing to pass this cycle.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 11:20 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
What was more surprising: how the breakdown between states with more dangerous drivers and safer drivers fell almost completely along the lines of the 2008 McCain-Obama election, with the Republicans again coming up on the short end. Nine of the 10 worst-performing states went for McCain, while nine of the 10 best performers voted for Obama

Yes, that certainly is surprising. Whenever I see an "Obama '08" bumper sticker on a car, I interpret it as saying "Warning: I am a Bad Driver." Seldom am I given cause to revise my initial assumption.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 12:21 pm
Quote:
Communist Party USA motto is "YES WE CAN!"
Saul Alinsky's Socialist Rules for Radicals motto and theme is "HOPE AND CHANGE"...
...Think the communist threat is past? Think again!
From June 15, 2010:
Last month, the Communist Party USA held its convention in New York where the program to take over America continued to be laid out. A program that would destroy America and American ideals and place us all under Marxist Communist control. Each point was met with boistrous chants of, "Yes We Can!"

Saul Alinsky was a Community Organizer based out of Chicago, advocate of Socialism & Communism, and author of "Rules for Radicals" (championed as the Communist Manifesto for the modern times). The agitator's job, according to Alinsky, is "first to bring folks to the realization that they are miserable, their misery is a result of greedy corporations, help bond them together and demand what they deserve from said greedy corporations". Barack Obama sounds terrifyingly similar to Alinsky when he speaks of taking profits from "greedy companies" and distributing that capital to those he sees fit. Alinsky's approach to social justice relies solely on creating massive conflict between those who "have" and those who "have-not".

Alinsky proclaimed that "we have a war on our hands... a war between those with the money and those with the people... if we can convince the people they are miserable, then we can gather the people". Again, Obama is the champion of creating tension through class warfare in demonizing the rich, and striving to tax them into oblivion.

"The use of 'The Ideology of Change and Hope', Alinsky proclaims "is a power technique (and) is key to mobilizing 'the dispossessed' to ban together and create pressure on the system". The use of "Hope" and "change" is something Alinksy taught as an Ideological power technique... interesting that Obama's entire campaign is based on themes of "hope and change we can believe in".

It is no conincidence that Obama uses all these mantras. He is indoctrinated in communisim and marxism. Look at what he says and what he has been doing for almost two years. His march toward marxism and totalitarianism is indisputable. Obama must be recognized to be a communist and marxist and not glossed over like the communist media that is a cohort of the black marxist.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 12:24 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
His march toward marxism and totalitarianism is indisputable.


Well that's just plain wrong; I'm disputing it. So it's clearly not indisputable.

These pieces of yours would be taken more seriously if you had any specifics to point to.

Cycloptichorn
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 12:37 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Obama's march toward marxism and totalitarianism is not LOGICALLY disputable.

Leftist liberals seek to secure their right to steal wealth others earn.

Rightist liberals seek to secure their right to retain wealth they earn.


0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 12:46 pm
Not unduly obstructionist?

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/29/coburn-haiti-earthquake-objection/

Quote:
Coburn Holding Up Millions Of Dollars In Aid For Haiti Earthquake Survivors Over Obscure Objection

coburnian Last spring, the United States pledged nearly $1.2 billion in emergency aid to Haiti following its tragic earthquake that left hundreds of thousands of people dead and many more homeless.

Yet the Associated Press (AP) reports today that “not a cent of the $1.15 billion the U.S. promised for rebuilding has arrived” to Haitians who badly the need the aid. This summer, both the House and the Senate passed a bill that would make $917 million available for Haiti reconstruction aid. Yet Congress must also pass an authorization bill that directs exactly how the money will be spent, and thus far, the U.S. Senate has failed to do.

The AP conducted its own investigation of why the Senate has failed to pass the authorization bill, and it discovered that a single senator “pulled it for further study.” After calling dozens of senators’ offices, the AP discovered that the senator holding up the bill is Tom Coburn (R-OK). Coburn spokeswoman Becky Berhardt explained that the reason he is holding up the bill is because he objects to the creation of a senior Haiti coordinator — a position that would cost a paltry $5 million over five years — when the United States currently has an ambassador to the country.


What a dick.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Wed 29 Sep, 2010 01:27 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
He's marching towards an election Cyclo. If the electorate is marching in those directions so will he. He's a politician and they know upon which side the bread is buttered.

Those paying for Obamacare are more articulate than those benefitting from it, as groups, but they only have one vote each despite the latter lot being skint and onto something for nothing. The universal franchise might turn out to be not as good an idea as its starry-eyed promoters thought thanks to them having a starry-eyed view of human nature.

Marx can't be discredited because of the Soviet failure, if such it is, and nor can one rule out a benign dictatorship. There's a direction to events. Spengler predicted our decline a hundred years ago partly based on the ruling classes failing to reproduce themselves, as happened in ancient Rome. They get too indulgent with their wealth to be bothered with bloody babies caterwauling half the night and shitting their nappy full. There are so many other interesting things to do. Oh--they might have one or two to be considered normal, or for the novelty, but as a class, they don't keep their end up.

I have no idea which direction we should be marching in. I never have had apart from a brief period in active politics but I was only acting. For both sides of course. One can't get a balanced view unless you do that. They were identical in the back rooms apart from accents and other insignia of reds (socialist here) and blues (conservatives).

There's no need to be defensive about marching in those directions. The left agenda is about nothing else. It shows you're winning. And the respectable right has been cowed into accepting most of it. And it may be a necessary direction. Who knows?

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 12/28/2025 at 11:22:56