Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why don't Liberals Hate Mitt Romney?

Page 3 of 7 [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

01 Oct 2011, 6:22 pm

Obres wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The lunatic fringe in this case believes that evolution is a disproved theory, and that the earth's age can be numerated in only thousands of years rather than millions - a view they believe should be taught in schools. There is no human influence in global warming (if it's believed in at all), since everyone knows that big industries mean no one harm. And that our foreign policy has to fit with the end time theology that teaches that Christ will return to the planet to instigate his thousand year reign. Oh, and that not only can you pray the gay away, but maybe it should be punished with a death sentence. And how can I forget - poor and middle class people should be made to shoulder the income tax burden (Perry and Bachmann have already demonized the rest of us for "not paying any taxes").
Sounds pretty insane to me.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Oh, and you forgot that they're scared to death of Sharia Law, a code that says... well, pretty much everything you just said there.


Don't know much about sharia law I know that its in Islam Christianity has some pretty harsh laws to that I do not agree with



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2011, 6:33 pm

Joker wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Joker wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Mitt Romney is a tea party favorite so Liberals will not like him its that simple I just think he is a bit weird


Are you sure about the tea party thing? I had always heard that they considered him a phony conservative, and so have been keeping him back from them with a ten foot pole. That, and because evangelicals are so prominent among the tea baggers, they are more than a little suspicious of his Mormonism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


That to but I know I lot of evangelicals who would rather support a moron president then a president they think is a Muslim I have muslim friends so I dont care what religion anyone is I care about my religion thats it :lol:

Plus a lot of republicans on facebook support Mitt Romney


More and more Republicans are taking a second look at Newt Gingrich, whom actually has a pretty good plan and a record of getting things accomplished.


Mitt Romney is a likeable guy this Newt Gingrich guy is a big fake he gets things done in a very underhanded way.


Plus, as far as I am aware, Gingrich is still operating without a staff, all of whom had deserted him after his misstatements and flip flopping on his original opposition to the heartless Ryan plan which had cost him all credibility.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

01 Oct 2011, 6:36 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Joker wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Mitt Romney is a tea party favorite so Liberals will not like him its that simple I just think he is a bit weird


Are you sure about the tea party thing? I had always heard that they considered him a phony conservative, and so have been keeping him back from them with a ten foot pole. That, and because evangelicals are so prominent among the tea baggers, they are more than a little suspicious of his Mormonism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


That to but I know I lot of evangelicals who would rather support a moron president then a president they think is a Muslim I have muslim friends so I dont care what religion anyone is I care about my religion thats it :lol:

Plus a lot of republicans on facebook support Mitt Romney


More and more Republicans are taking a second look at Newt Gingrich, whom actually has a pretty good plan and a record of getting things accomplished.


Mitt Romney is a likeable guy this Newt Gingrich guy is a big fake he gets things done in a very underhanded way.


Plus, as far as I am aware, Gingrich is still operating without a staff, all of whom had deserted him after his misstatements and flip flopping on his original opposition to the heartless Ryan plan which had cost him all credibility.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I was unaware of that I will have to take a closer look at Gingrich



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

01 Oct 2011, 8:10 pm

DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat


Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

01 Oct 2011, 8:16 pm

MarketAndChurch wrote:
Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

Then explain why the past three years have seen nothing but capitulation from the Democrats, and why Obama has overseen the most right-wing government in the past 80 years.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

01 Oct 2011, 8:21 pm

MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


patently and provably untrue.
you saw the polls and congress reflects the polls.
Republicans are more ideological than democrats
you know It I know it saying otherwise is dishonest.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Oct 2011, 8:23 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Joker wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Mitt Romney is a tea party favorite so Liberals will not like him its that simple I just think he is a bit weird


Are you sure about the tea party thing? I had always heard that they considered him a phony conservative, and so have been keeping him back from them with a ten foot pole. That, and because evangelicals are so prominent among the tea baggers, they are more than a little suspicious of his Mormonism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


That to but I know I lot of evangelicals who would rather support a moron president then a president they think is a Muslim I have muslim friends so I dont care what religion anyone is I care about my religion thats it :lol:

Plus a lot of republicans on facebook support Mitt Romney


More and more Republicans are taking a second look at Newt Gingrich, whom actually has a pretty good plan and a record of getting things accomplished.


Mitt Romney is a likeable guy this Newt Gingrich guy is a big fake he gets things done in a very underhanded way.


Plus, as far as I am aware, Gingrich is still operating without a staff, all of whom had deserted him after his misstatements and flip flopping on his original opposition to the heartless Ryan plan which had cost him all credibility.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Did he flip-flop, or was it the result of still being in Analyst mode from his previous job. You should be careful Kraichgauer, one reporter tried to nail him on ''the staff quitting' ended up with egg in his face.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_DEgfkiqY[/youtube]



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2011, 8:24 pm

MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


Ever hear of Mary Landrue (spelling) in Louisiana? She is pretty representative of her conservative voters.
And by the way, I consider Frank, Reid, Rangel, etc. as pretty mainstream, with a lot of popular support, considering that they want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and make healthcare available to all Americans.
I really don't know how many of Perry's or Bachmann's ordinary, run-of-the mill voters would continue to support them if they knew how such politicians were planning to extend the income tax to middle class and poor people. Pretty extreme if you ask me, and not the kind of politicians who would inspire people to follow them, were they informed.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Oct 2011, 8:27 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


Ever hear of Mary Landrue (spelling) in Louisiana? She is pretty representative of her conservative voters.
And by the way, I consider Frank, Reid, Rangel, etc. as pretty mainstream, with a lot of popular support, considering that they want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and make healthcare available to all Americans.
I really don't know how many of Perry's or Bachmann's ordinary, run-of-the mill voters would continue to support them if they knew how such politicians were planning to extend the income tax to middle class and poor people. Pretty extreme if you ask me, and not the kind of politicians who would inspire people to follow them, were they informed.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


What part of unconstitutional do you not understand.

If Government is allowed to tell people they have to enter into a contract simply because they are alive, then we have no rights. The difference between auto insurance and health insurance is you choose to buy a car, short of committing suicide you can't choose to have your heart stop beating. People have the right to choose not to participate in commerce.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2011, 8:32 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Joker wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Mitt Romney is a tea party favorite so Liberals will not like him its that simple I just think he is a bit weird


Are you sure about the tea party thing? I had always heard that they considered him a phony conservative, and so have been keeping him back from them with a ten foot pole. That, and because evangelicals are so prominent among the tea baggers, they are more than a little suspicious of his Mormonism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


That to but I know I lot of evangelicals who would rather support a moron president then a president they think is a Muslim I have muslim friends so I dont care what religion anyone is I care about my religion thats it :lol:

Plus a lot of republicans on facebook support Mitt Romney


More and more Republicans are taking a second look at Newt Gingrich, whom actually has a pretty good plan and a record of getting things accomplished.


Mitt Romney is a likeable guy this Newt Gingrich guy is a big fake he gets things done in a very underhanded way.


Plus, as far as I am aware, Gingrich is still operating without a staff, all of whom had deserted him after his misstatements and flip flopping on his original opposition to the heartless Ryan plan which had cost him all credibility.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Did he flip-flop, or was it the result of still being in Analyst mode from his previous job. You should be careful Kraichgauer, one reporter tried to nail him on ''the staff quitting' ended up with egg in his face.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_DEgfkiqY[/youtube]


No egg on my face. Gingrich failed to answer the question satisfactorily. Instead, he ranted about President Obama to draw attention away from his flailing campaign. And by the way, his staffers didn't leave because of mismanagement on their part, but do to his own.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Oct 2011, 8:35 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Joker wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Joker wrote:
Mitt Romney is a tea party favorite so Liberals will not like him its that simple I just think he is a bit weird


Are you sure about the tea party thing? I had always heard that they considered him a phony conservative, and so have been keeping him back from them with a ten foot pole. That, and because evangelicals are so prominent among the tea baggers, they are more than a little suspicious of his Mormonism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


That to but I know I lot of evangelicals who would rather support a moron president then a president they think is a Muslim I have muslim friends so I dont care what religion anyone is I care about my religion thats it :lol:

Plus a lot of republicans on facebook support Mitt Romney


More and more Republicans are taking a second look at Newt Gingrich, whom actually has a pretty good plan and a record of getting things accomplished.


Mitt Romney is a likeable guy this Newt Gingrich guy is a big fake he gets things done in a very underhanded way.


Plus, as far as I am aware, Gingrich is still operating without a staff, all of whom had deserted him after his misstatements and flip flopping on his original opposition to the heartless Ryan plan which had cost him all credibility.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Did he flip-flop, or was it the result of still being in Analyst mode from his previous job. You should be careful Kraichgauer, one reporter tried to nail him on ''the staff quitting' ended up with egg in his face.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_DEgfkiqY[/youtube]


No egg on my face. Gingrich failed to answer the question satisfactorily. Instead, he ranted about President Obama to draw attention away from his flailing campaign. And by the way, his staffers didn't leave because of mismanagement on their part, but do to his own.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Actually he pointed out that it happens to campaigns a lot, and they're making a big deal out of nothing. Furthermore, you need to see the beginning of the debate again where it was stated that they should be focusing on the current crisis occurring.



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

01 Oct 2011, 8:35 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


patently and provably untrue.
you saw the polls and congress reflects the polls.
Republicans are more ideological than democrats
you know It I know it saying otherwise is dishonest.


you can say it is untrue but their voting records speak for themselves. The non ideological dems are blue-dogs who represent a conservative district.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2011, 8:38 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


Ever hear of Mary Landrue (spelling) in Louisiana? She is pretty representative of her conservative voters.
And by the way, I consider Frank, Reid, Rangel, etc. as pretty mainstream, with a lot of popular support, considering that they want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and make healthcare available to all Americans.
I really don't know how many of Perry's or Bachmann's ordinary, run-of-the mill voters would continue to support them if they knew how such politicians were planning to extend the income tax to middle class and poor people. Pretty extreme if you ask me, and not the kind of politicians who would inspire people to follow them, were they informed.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


What part of unconstitutional do you not understand.

If Government is allowed to tell people they have to enter into a contract simply because they are alive, then we have no rights. The difference between auto insurance and health insurance is you choose to buy a car, short of committing suicide you can't choose to have your heart stop beating. People have the right to choose not to participate in commerce.


The supposed unconstitutionality of healthcare isn't the point of my post - rather, it's that healthcare reform has great popular support, regardless of what Republicans claim.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Oct 2011, 8:40 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


Ever hear of Mary Landrue (spelling) in Louisiana? She is pretty representative of her conservative voters.
And by the way, I consider Frank, Reid, Rangel, etc. as pretty mainstream, with a lot of popular support, considering that they want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and make healthcare available to all Americans.
I really don't know how many of Perry's or Bachmann's ordinary, run-of-the mill voters would continue to support them if they knew how such politicians were planning to extend the income tax to middle class and poor people. Pretty extreme if you ask me, and not the kind of politicians who would inspire people to follow them, were they informed.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


What part of unconstitutional do you not understand.

If Government is allowed to tell people they have to enter into a contract simply because they are alive, then we have no rights. The difference between auto insurance and health insurance is you choose to buy a car, short of committing suicide you can't choose to have your heart stop beating. People have the right to choose not to participate in commerce.


The supposed unconstitutionality of healthcare isn't the point of my post - rather, it's that healthcare reform has great popular support, regardless of what Republicans claim.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Just because an idea is popular doesn't mean it should be implimented, especially when it is unconstitutional.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2011, 8:46 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
DC wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Oh, I think he did have a political philosophy at one time - he was a moderate Republican, who could get himself elected in a blue state. But because Republicans like him are now a thing of the past, much like dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, he's had to throw away everything he had believed in in order to satisfy the lunatic fringe of the Republican party.


Shouldn't that be 'lunatic Republican party' not 'lunatic fringe'?


No, what has actually gone the way of the dinosaurs and the wooly mammoths are centrists, period! (regardless of party affiliation).

As for 2011:
    there is 0 democrats with a more conservative voting record then the most liberal republican
    there is 0 republicans with a more liberal voting record then the most conservative democrat

Romney is not just a dying breed in the GOP. The Democrats barely break from the party orthodoxy, and helped make 2010 the most partisan year in the last 30 years. Romney's "centrist" comparison from left of center could be Ron Wyden or Gabrielle Giffords, Joe Lieberman, Max Bucacas, or Ben Nelson, but for dominating last year's House and Senate, you think there would be a few more moderates but there aren't any. There is no way in the world one can be against increasing taxes on the rich and supporting domestic off-shore drilling and be allowed by the left to be called a Democrat. Ideological purity is just as strong on the other side(if not stronger) of the isle and Democrats have no interest in running anything less then a progressive who will not bend for the political center or for the right.

If Boehner and company, Palin, or Bachmann are fringe in one direction, then Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, and Charles Rangel are "fringe" in the other since they portion of the electorate that their positions and opinions represent is not very large... certainly not large enough to warrant as much exposure as they have.


Ever hear of Mary Landrue (spelling) in Louisiana? She is pretty representative of her conservative voters.
And by the way, I consider Frank, Reid, Rangel, etc. as pretty mainstream, with a lot of popular support, considering that they want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and make healthcare available to all Americans.
I really don't know how many of Perry's or Bachmann's ordinary, run-of-the mill voters would continue to support them if they knew how such politicians were planning to extend the income tax to middle class and poor people. Pretty extreme if you ask me, and not the kind of politicians who would inspire people to follow them, were they informed.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


What part of unconstitutional do you not understand.

If Government is allowed to tell people they have to enter into a contract simply because they are alive, then we have no rights. The difference between auto insurance and health insurance is you choose to buy a car, short of committing suicide you can't choose to have your heart stop beating. People have the right to choose not to participate in commerce.


The supposed unconstitutionality of healthcare isn't the point of my post - rather, it's that healthcare reform has great popular support, regardless of what Republicans claim.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Just because an idea is popular doesn't mean it should be implimented, especially when it is unconstitutional.


Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase was considered unconstitutional in its day, but without it, the United States may to this day have been restricted to the east coast. Sometimes, the president has to take charge and do the what's best for the country, rather than being hindered by the letter of the law.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

01 Oct 2011, 8:46 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
Republicans are more ideological than democrats.

Not really. Republicans have no ideology. They oppose tax cuts when those cuts would go to the middle class. They support spending that's not paid for when that money goes to themselves or to their rich donors. The GOP is not a party of ideology at all; it is only a party of class warfare and looting the country for the benefit of a privileged few.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH