Question for Republicans

[lifegoesonbrah]

And we heard the same thing in '08 and then '10 happened...hmmm. Every election the Dems win, immediately represents the final demise of the GOP and clearly demonstrates the need to move to the left. Funny how that works and then an eight or twelve year run by the GOP fucks that theory right up the ass.

They don't need to move to the left, they need to move from authoritarianism to libertarianism. Until then, their platform makes no sense.

 

[cannabineer]

The Berlin wall is an example of controlling the border, limiting people to move about freely. Protecting the border would be to stop invading armies from entering your country to cause harm to citizens.

Got it; thanks. cn

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Ummm. Democrats are about as authoritarian as you can get. They even pick out our light bulbs for us. Flourescent is bullshit. Takes forever to get full brightness and flickers so bad you get a seizure.

 

[lifegoesonbrah]

Ummm. Democrats are about as authoritarian as you can get. They even pick out our light bulbs for us. Flourescent is bullshit. Takes forever to get full brightness and flickers so bad you get a seizure.

oui, but remember the point of the thread is to expose the hypocrisy of the repubs claims of freedom. The dems are admitted authoritarians, repubs still in denial or something.

 

[Jogro]

You are also ignoring that after the Democrats changed their views ad went along with civil rights, the Jim Crow proponents and racists left and went to the GOP in order to seek revenge and get the Democrats back.

I'm not "ignoring" anything. The question was what did the GOP do for freedom. Ending American slavery doesn't count in your book?

As to the rest of this, when did Democrats "change their views"? They're still the party of race, just their target demographic has changed a bit.

This is why the South used to be primarily Democratic but it no longer is.You can try to talk history, but you can't change the facts.

Sure. . .this is true, if you believe that the ONLY significant motivating factor in voting is racism. IE there are no economic, foreign policy, domestic policy, or any other platform reasons why people might choose to support one party over another. Of course if you view everything through the prism of race, then of course you're always going to see racism everywhere.

In the meantime, Carter swept the South in 1976. Clinton took a number of Southern States in 1992. There are any number of Dems holding State offices in the South. For example, the Governorship of the State of Alabama has switched between D and R multiple times in the past 20 years. If you want a bit of a more nuanced view of why the South has gone strongly Republican (especially this last cycle) see here:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45627_Page2.html

Today which party is promoting racism and hatred?

Well, overtly racial appeals and constant accusations of racism do form a core strategy of one party, that's for sure.

Here's one famous recent example that springs to mind; there are plenty of others:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79717.html

 

[Jogro]

Nothing, because the neocons don't support his ideas of true freedom.

I see.

So your guy didn't do squat and you're blaming the GOP.

Are the Democrats the party of "true freedom" then?

Because if they aren't, and the GOP isn't, then who is?

Incidentally, if I'm looking for your "true freedom" which country on the planet should I visit to find it?

 

[Jogro]

oui, but remember the point of the thread is to expose the hypocrisy of the repubs claims of freedom. The dems are admitted authoritarians, repubs still in denial or something.

With respect, I think your premise here is faulty.

I don't hear the Republicans crowing about "freedom"; that's what you Paulians go on about.

Instead, the Republicans are supposed to stand for "small gov't" (which is a different thing).

Some of the Republicans are interested in Federalism, which is, again, a different thing yet. (And note that apparently you can't say "States rights", because that's racist, or something).

Now whether they really mean it, or just give it lip service. . .I think that's the question.

Again, I agree the GOP has been lousy at pushing a small gov't agenda when it had the opportunity to pull it off.

I do think the current GOP House majority is more sincere about this than any other in the last 20 years; you do have a bunch of "tea party" congresspersons in place who really do want smaller gov't now, but the problem, of course, is that the House is outnumbered 2:1 and is effectively impotent.

 

[Jogro]

Jogro,
You sure the O-man isn't Republican? He sure likes continuing Republican failures. He's the R candyman! No?

No Obama isn't a Republican. He's also got plenty of failures of his own.

The problem is that the Republicans aren't Republicans, either. . . which I think is the point of this thread.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Jogro,
Huh?Obama is the super Republican.He escalated the war on drugs started by Nixon.He escalated the war on terror by Bush.He uses the military more than Bush, which Dems say is Rep.He wants to get rid of welfare restristions set by Clinton.Say again?

 

[Jogro]

Jogro,
Huh?Obama is the super Republican.He escalated the war on drugs started by Nixon.He escalated the war on terror by Bush.He uses the military more than Bush, which Dems say is Rep.He wants to get rid of welfare restristions set by Clinton.Say again?

He's already gotten rid of Clinton's welfare reform.

Obama has "escalated" EVERY Federal program, which (on paper at least) makes him the "anti-Republican".

The Dems like to claim that the Republicans are the pro-war party, but empirically its not true. The Dems (not GOP) is always the party pushing for "humanitarian" use of American military (eg Kosovo, Rwanda, now Syria, etc). The GOP typically resists these efforts unless there is a clear American interest involved, and the public usually agrees. . .but once there is, THEN the GOP supports military effort.

Obama halted the war in Iraq. You can argue whether what he did there is good or bad, but that's at the very least fairly "anti-Bush".

On the other hand, Bush made a case for, and got Congressional approval for his wars. Not only did Obama not seek (or obtain) Congressional approval for US military action in Libya, I still don't know what the hell our "mission" there was supposed to be. (I'm sure there WAS one. ..just that the President didn't see fit to share it with the rest of us).

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Jogro, There's so many here on this forum who'd beg to differ. It's also potential grounds for racism.

 

[Saltrock]

The Republican party was founded by anti-slavery activists in 1830 and was the single biggest political driving force in ending American slavery.

First Republican US President. . .Abraham Lincoln.

Does ending slavery count as "promoting the cause of liberty"?

Not incidentally, for over fifty years, the biggest proponents of Jim Crow laws and racial segregation in the American South was the Democrat party.

This history is so politically damaging to the party that the Dem party has deliberately scrubbed all history of it from its records:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121856786326834083.html

So, which party is the party of racism, and which party is the party of freedom?

I hope you realize that the democratic and the republican party of those days had way different values then they do now. I don't know when it flip flopped , but Republicans used to be about the poor and middle class and isolationism. These neocons have fucked up the party, they got in bed with big business, they promote globalization, they love war, they always depended on the white vote and to top that there social values are horrific. Which explains why they are trying to move to middle immigration(because they have to). The only thing the party has going for it are the talking points, less government, less taxes, personal and fiscal responsibility. Which they do none of when they are in power. I guess they need to start giving gifts like obama did.

Peace
Salt

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Salty,
Are you sure you aren't describing the Democrats?

 

[mccumcumber]

What happened when Republicans would elect good nominees like Eisenhower. I swear, the party has gone downhill ever since.

 

[Saltrock]

Salty,
Are you sure you aren't describing the Democrats?

To my recollection the democrats were pro slave and pro big business. Republicans on the other hand appealed to lower class, strong central government, and wanted to end slavery. Obviously some southern republicans probably didn't think slavery was bad.

Peace
Salt

 

[Saltrock]

Salty,
Are you sure you aren't describing the Democrats?

I will acknowledge that I don't think democrats are perfect. But I tend to lean towards the lesser of two evils.

Peace
Salt

 

[Canna Sylvan]

How? When both are the same? The only difference is talking points, which neither come through upon. See how long the Dems can support their talking points if they actually did them. I despise the Dem talking points if if they could magically do them.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Salty,
I mean, Dems hate religion unless it's Islam. Yet Islam to this day is the only religion who has slaves in Africa. Obama gives out money to everything green, but MJ.Pro-death with the military and abortion,horrific social values.Got the white vote.

 

[Saltrock]

Salty,
I mean, Dems hate religion unless it's Islam. Yet Islam to this day is the only religion who has slaves in Africa.

Obama gives out money to everything green

, but MJ.Pro-death with the military and abortion,horrific social values.Got the white vote.

I agree for the most part that both parties are one in the same. How do dems hate religion?

Obama gives out money to everything green

Duh, that is what democrats do. The republicans are suppost to counter that , but they spend too.

Peace
Salt

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Salty,
You trying to troll me? Liberals say white christian values hate gays getting married, etc. Only the religious are against abortion. Stem cell ban is supposedly because of religion. Yet, Democrats aren't at war with religion?