23
   

American Conservatism In 2012 & Beyond

 
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 06:39 pm
@Thomas,
Basically, Boortz's approach is what the Tea Party did in 2010 - they kept rhetoric away from social issues.

Problem is, as soon as they got sworn in, they showed their true colors as social conservatives.
jcboy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:04 pm
Also, for such a big landslide, we kept hearing from the "mainstream liberal" media how close this race was going to be. I'm not optimistic but maybe people will finally realize that the media is owned by huge corporations and it doesn't have a liberal or conservative bias. It has a ratings bias.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:12 pm
@parados,
Its a hell of a lot more centrest than any of the radio stations in my area.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:41 pm
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:
These people (Rove, Morris et al) are completely out of touch with reality. They made concrete predictions, confidently, that were tested and turned out to be WRONG. Really wrong.

Yeah right, there you go again with your scientific-method thing. Talk about liberal bias. Really, Sozobe!

Sozobe wrote:
This is on both sides of course, though Fox is a particular offender.

And that's the nicest-to-Fox way to put it. A few days ago, I deliberately looked for the closest thing that leftie TV networks have to Hannity and O'Reilly. The worst I could find were Al Sharptom and Ed Schultz on MSNBC, who don't come even close in craziness and dishonesty. It's an order-of-magnitude thing? (And may I just squeeze in that I really miss Al Franken's show on Radio America?)
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:44 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
It would interesting to see a breakdown of how the two parties accumulated and then spent their money. I was fortunate to be in IL (very blue) and LA (very red) during the election cycle. I didn't see one ad on the presidential race. Not one. I'm not the least bit sad about that. I did receive NUMEROUS phone calls and email requesting $$$ but I think those folks were probably all volunteers. Do I see Obama as trying to buy the election? No. I see him as trying to compete with the game thrown down from the other side. I'd embrace campaign finance reform that restricts donations only to individual registered voters and limiting the amt, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:51 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
Basically, Boortz's approach is what the Tea Party did in 2010 - they kept rhetoric away from social issues.

Like when Rand Paul suggested that the Civil-Rights Act of 1964 was unconstitutional? That looked pretty entangled with social issues to me.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Nov, 2012 07:58 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I'm sure I could find them, but you could do so just as easily.

I'm not trying to be flip, I just see no reason to work at providing you with what you can obtain for yourself.

I doubt you and I look in the same places for opinion pieces and I was interested in what you read that prompted your post, but I understand you position.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  5  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 03:57 am
Personally, i hope the teabaggers continue to rant about abortion and rape and gay marriage and any other things they think is wrong with our society. It's so much easier to marginalize a wingnut when they're already out in front of you on the job.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 06:26 am
@Setanta,
agreed
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 07:10 am
@Setanta,
yes

It became very clear to me after the Todd Akin dustup that I wasn't paying close enough attention to the bills my congressman was voting on.
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 11:54 am
Wasn't sure where to drop this article link and then I thought teenagers are our future so this scary thread makes too much sense:

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! The future of conservatism in America!

Racist Teens Forced to Answer for Tweets About the ‘Nigger’ President
http://jezebel.com/5958993/racist-teens-forced-to-answer-for-tweets-about-the-nigger-president


0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 12:15 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:
It became very clear to me after the Todd Akin dustup that I wasn't paying close enough attention to the bills my congressman was voting on.

What did you find when you started to pay attention? Any dead bodies in the closet?
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2012 12:19 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

yes

It became very clear to me after the Todd Akin dustup that I wasn't paying close enough attention to the bills my congressman was voting on.

I've been living in Brooklyn for since August. I knew my rep was Nydia M. Velazquez. Other then that, I wasn't too aware of her political stature.

I miss having Carolyn Maloney as my rep. She's far more out there in the public eye then this Velazquez.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Sat 10 Nov, 2012 02:35 pm
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:

I'm referring to George P. Bush.


And right on schedule:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/us/politics/george-p-bush-ex-presidents-nephew-may-seek-office-in-texas.html

Quote:
AMARILLO, Tex. — George P. Bush, a nephew of former President George W. Bush, has filed papers indicating that he intends to run for statewide office in Texas, the first official step toward public office for a young lawyer whom many Texas Republicans view as one of their dynamic future stars.

Mr. Bush, 36, whose father, Jeb, is a former Florida governor, filed paperwork with the Texas Ethics Commission in Austin on Wednesday appointing a campaign treasurer, a requirement of any candidate seeking state-level office. The filing came nearly 12 years after his uncle left the Governor’s Mansion in Austin to become the 43rd president of the United States.

Mr. Bush left blank the section where candidates list the offices they are seeking. Some political operatives close to him say that Mr. Bush has not yet made a decision on what position to run for in the 2014 elections. Although many believe that he is likely to run for state land commissioner or attorney general, other offices are not out of the question.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 11:50 am
This should make the Republican primaries interesting. Karl Rove vs Grover Norquist in the primary battle.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/karl-rove-and-his-super-pac-vow-to-press-on/2012/11/10/19ed28ea-2a96-11e2-b4e0-346287b7e56c_story.html?hpid=z2
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 12:10 pm
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

Quote:
the repubs have got to learn how to talk to women and minorities


Shouldn't be hard. They already have binders full of them.


There are just some place Liberals go that are entirely foreign realms to me.

Try as I might, I simply don't understand why they found Romney's comment about binders of women so offensive and deserving of derision.

I've imagined the same comment coming out of Obama's lips and still don't see the problem.

I can only imagine that they didn't listen to what he was saying excepet to find a comment or phrase upon which to pounce, and even still, "binders of women" was a paltry, at best, catch.

You do know that he was referring to binders of profiles /resumes on women he would consider for inclusion in his administration in Mass., don't you?

I would have thought you would have applauded his affirmative effort to include qualified women in his administration, not to mention the results of that effort.

At this point let me save the anticipated witless would-be wit who will rush to post someting like:

"The fact that you don't get it Finn is proof of your woman-hating mentality."

Frankly, that would be a silly cop-out.

If it resonated so widely among you all, surely you can articulate why.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 12:30 pm
@JPB,
This is why a discussion, in this forum, of the election is essentially pointless.

Both sides spent hundreds of millions of dollars on their campaigns. Both sides trumpted the amounts they collected and were hardly shy about announcing how much they had spent.

The money was spent primarily on advertising, although quite a lot went into organizational infrastructure and the "ground game."

Both side relied heavily on massive donations from organizations and bundlers of wealthy contributors.

Both sides had areas of their collection activities that can be called into question.

And yet you choose to see Romney as trying to buy the election and Obama simply doing what he had to do to combat those bastards in the GOP.

Polemics are more satifying.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 12:45 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Try as I might, I simply don't understand why they found Romney's comment about binders of women so offensive and deserving of derision.

I didn't find it offensive, but I do think it deserving of derision.

It's deserving of derision because it's simultaneously extraordinarily inept and completely revealing.

It's inept, because people in 2012 don't often talk about "binders." It's inept, because it gave us a window into how he thinks, and it wasn't flattering at all.

It's revealing in that he felt he was unable to find any qualified women, without resorting to a portfolio created by a third party.
1. It shows that he surrounded himself only with men.
2. It shows that he felt himself unable to find qualified women on his own behalf.

It was funny. It was hilariously inept.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 01:05 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

This is why a discussion, in this forum, of the election is essentially pointless.

Both sides spent hundreds of millions of dollars on their campaigns. Both sides trumpted the amounts they collected and were hardly shy about announcing how much they had spent.

The money was spent primarily on advertising, although quite a lot went into organizational infrastructure and the "ground game."

Both side relied heavily on massive donations from organizations and bundlers of wealthy contributors.

Both sides had areas of their collection activities that can be called into question.

And yet you choose to see Romney as trying to buy the election and Obama simply doing what he had to do to combat those bastards in the GOP.

Polemics are more satifying.


No, I see Citizens United (the group) as a conservative enterprise that filed and won a lawsuit against the FEC resulting in the proliferation of outside spending in the election cycle. I don't see any history of a liberal group suing the government to allow corporations to be classified as people or for the establishment of Super-PACs. That leftists responded to the new reality isn't surprising.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 01:17 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

JPB wrote:
It became very clear to me after the Todd Akin dustup that I wasn't paying close enough attention to the bills my congressman was voting on.

What did you find when you started to pay attention? Any dead bodies in the closet?


Yeah, my supposedly moderate, pro-choice, Republican Congressman (who I voted for in 2010) lost his seat (a seat that had been held by moderate Republicans since before I moved here in 1988) to his D opponent. My involvement in the race was to actively work for his opponent after I discovered he'd voted in favor of Akin's HR-3 which "legitimized" only certain kinds of rape. He gets to return to his day job and a decades-long R House seat swung D.
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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/09/2022 at 07:02:08