I think you would have to go back into the 1800s, into the Republican Congress swept into power with William McKinley's 1896 election, to find a party as thoroughly reactionary as this one. This is somehow appropriate, because these Republicans clearly do want to repeal the 20th century. Starting with the early Progressive movement reforms Teddy Roosevelt got accomplished, the tea party GOP is trying to roll back all the progress our country has seen over the last century plus.
“We want a society where people are free to make choices, to make mistakes, to be generous and compassionate. This is what we mean by a moral society; not a society where the state is responsible for everything, and no one is responsible for the state.” ― Margaret Thatcher.
It is an extreme extrapolation to make one side seem more extreme than they are...something you can really sink your teeth in and make a day of...has as much relevance as an opinion piece about how President Obama is working on resurrecting the old USSR here in North America.
“We want a society where people are free to make choices, to make mistakes, to be generous and compassionate. This is what we mean by a moral society; not a society where the state is responsible for everything, and no one is responsible for the state.” ― Margaret Thatcher.
It is an extreme extrapolation to make one side seem more extreme than they are...something you can really sink your teeth in and make a day of...has as much relevance as an opinion piece about how President Obama is working on resurrecting the old USSR here in North America.
When Arizona conservatives manage to get a law passed that marks the end of a woman's last menstrual period as the start of a pregnancy, then you must understand why your party is viewed as Reactionary (with a capital R) by the rest of us.
Also, draconian cuts to every type of public spending (aside from your favorite social welfare program, the military), refusal to consider any tax increases whatsoever on the highest of income earners, pandering to the wealthiest, constant dismissal of any proposal put forth by the other side (no, that did not happen to Bush at the level it's happening to Obama), a cynical disgregard for environmental initiatives, and more, further show just how Reactionary the far right wing of the party has become.
PS: Even making the comparison that Obama is trying to recreate the USSR is another example of your side's extremism. That comment is, speaking in the style of the McKinley era, complete balderdash. The stimulus was temporary, not permanent, spending, and the health care legislation closely resembles what YOUR CANDIDATE instituted in MA. Yet in reality, the far right fought Repulbican-styled health care reform and temporary emergency spending during the greatest economic collapse since '29.
Sure. About the kind of typical junk I'd expect from Huffington Post, especially from an author who's been long involved in liberal Democratic politics, and according to his HuffPo biography "In November of 2008, Mike was named to the Obama-Biden Transition Team."
Since it seems to be a term YOU like to throw around at others when you disagree, you might want to be honest and label that article HEAVILY agenda-driven - with the very transparent agenda being to discredit Republicans and do whatever he can to further the Obama re-election campaign.
And, as Seal has pointed out with his request, its just a HuffPo retread of an NPR article that Showman beat you to making a thread about by 4 full days.
Yes. It's true. The republicans, who were party to the massive expansion of government spending in all of these areas are the only party that has now proposed cuts to spending in these areas. Of course their goal is to create a sustainable federal budget plan. Definitely reactionary to the problem that our path is unsustainable.
Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is.
Sure. About the kind of typical junk I'd expect from Huffington Post, especially from an author who's been long involved in liberal Democratic politics, and according to his HuffPo biography "In November of 2008, Mike was named to the Obama-Biden Transition Team."
Since it seems to be a term YOU like to throw around at others when you disagree, you might want to be honest and label that article HEAVILY agenda-driven - with the very transparent agenda being to discredit Republicans and do whatever he can to further the Obama re-election campaign.
And, as Seal has pointed out with his request, its just a HuffPo retread of an NPR article that Showman beat you to making a thread about by 4 full days.
I agree that it is agenda driven, but if I called out all the politically agenda driven threads on this board, that's all I'd have time for. I've noticed none of you have pointed out that anything within the article itself is incorrect. Is that because you agree with what the author purports are the GOP goals?
I remember Showman's thread quite well. This is a different perspective on that thread. Which is why I started a new one.
Sure. About the kind of typical junk I'd expect from Huffington Post, especially from an author who's been long involved in liberal Democratic politics, and according to his HuffPo biography "In November of 2008, Mike was named to the Obama-Biden Transition Team."
Since it seems to be a term YOU like to throw around at others when you disagree, you might want to be honest and label that article HEAVILY agenda-driven - with the very transparent agenda being to discredit Republicans and do whatever he can to further the Obama re-election campaign.
And, as Seal has pointed out with his request, its just a HuffPo retread of an NPR article that Showman beat you to making a thread about by 4 full days.
Pathetic, insane, politically motivated article. Seems to imply, in a not-so-subtle way that if not for the Dems in the last 100 years, Pubs would still own slaves, keep women from voting, trashing the environment, forcing 12 year old kids to work in sweat shops for pennies a day, blah blah blah...........
You don't honestly buy into this political BS do you RP?
I used to have superpowers.....but my therapist took them away...
I agree that it is agenda driven, but if I called out all the politically agenda driven threads on this board, that's all I'd have time for. I've noticed none of you have pointed out that anything within the article itself is incorrect. Is that because you agree with what the author purports are the GOP goals?
I remember Showman's thread quite well. This is a different perspective on that thread. Which is why I started a new one.
The article is so far out and absurd as to not deserve the time to try to refute, line by line. Its every bit as ridiculous, and similar to, the other (similar) Democratic operative that Sonuva found for you claiming Romney wants to take voting rights away from blacks and women.
Yes. It's true. The republicans, who were party to the massive expansion of government spending in all of these areas are the only party that has now proposed cuts to spending in these areas. Of course their goal is to create a sustainable federal budget plan. Definitely reactionary to the problem that our path is unsustainable.
To be fair, two wars and the Bush tax cuts were certainly party to the massive expansion of government spending that got us where we are now. And you've got to admit, the Tea Party influence has certainly lent itself to a rabid intractability that hasn't allowed for any level of compromise to actually start fixing the deficit problem.
The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum--Noam Chomsky
Pathetic, insane, politically motivated article. Seems to imply, in a not-so-subtle way that if not for the Dems in the last 100 years, Pubs would still own slaves, keep women from voting, trashing the environment, forcing 12 year old kids to work in sweat shops for pennies a day, blah blah blah...........
You don't honestly buy into this political BS do you RP?
I'd say I agree that many Republicans today are accurately titled Social Darwinists.
Pathetic, insane, politically motivated article. Seems to imply, in a not-so-subtle way that if not for the Dems in the last 100 years, Pubs would still own slaves, keep women from voting, trashing the environment, forcing 12 year old kids to work in sweat shops for pennies a day, blah blah blah...........
You don't honestly buy into this political BS do you RP?
I have it on good authority that RP is much too intelligent to buy into political hyperbole.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by FLA4NEB
