Why I seriously dislike the republican party

[Slapper]

It's not the fat, senile, gay in the closet white men with a dangerous trigger-happy attitude, it's their seemingly hate and contempt of our republic. I mean, their whole discourse of the past few decades has been that "government is inefficient," while they've failed every time in pointing out WHAT exactly is inefficient about our government. I mean, they sure know how to use it to print money and hand it back to themselves!

The biggest lie about the republican party is that which is read "between the lines": "Government is inefficient". Really? Ok, if that is their issue, their beef then that means two things: They either are hardcore anarchists and the government is indeed inefficient, the way THEY run it course. But NO! That is not the bigger issue.

The truth of the matter is that under our laws sovereignty falls upon "We the people," meaning us, you and I, ALL Americans. What are the People's institutions? The federal, state and local governments. Hence the republicans are insinuating YOU ARE INEFFICIENT! Which basically explains half of their idiotically and moronically erratic actions of invading countries that have no beef with us or mortgaging our kids' future by printing money and halving the value of our currency while triplicating the country's deficit. I mean, they do not hide it either, they believe the country must be run by a handfull of individuals with a lot of money, individuals that precede profit to human life and then go to church to pray away the "sins". 

I tell you, the more I read about the repugnant party the more I realise the next civil war in this country is not going to be against a foreigner, it's going to be between liberals and conservatives. The other day, while at work, I was talking to this colleague of mine who said he was a republican. When he said that I suddenly got an urge to beat the shit out of him. Has this ever happened to you?

And I tell you, I ain't no friend of the democrats either. I gather they're republicans without the ego.

[headhuntersix]

I have the urge to put libs in camps every day...but I stifle myself I guess its good that slapper will never be in any position to actaully do anything about his rage. Don't worry slapper I'll make sure u get a nice orange jumpsuit in GITMO.

[Slapper]

I have the urge to put libs in camps every day...but I stifle myself I guess its good that slapper will never be in any position to actaully do anything about his rage. Don't worry slapper I'll make sure u get a nice orange jumpsuit in GITMO.

And I will make sure you are turned into soap.

[24KT]

"Can't We All Just Get Along?" --Rodney King

[w8tlftr]

"Can't We All Just Get Along?" --Rodney King

Apparently not. 

[Slapper]

"Can't We All Just Get Along?" --Rodney King

Well, as you can see, they have nothing to offer to the comment.

[George Whorewell]

As soon as I saw you disliked the republican party, it re-affirmed my belief that I could never be a democrat. Thank you.

[youandme]

At first I thought this thread would read "Why I seriously dislike that the republican party will win this election"

[Slapper]

As soon as I saw you disliked the republican party, it re-affirmed my belief that I could never be a democrat. Thank you.

I am not a democrat.

I am FAR to the left of the democrats.

[George Whorewell]

Slapper you are a mentally retarded fuckwad who is completely incapable of rational thought, regardless of what political party you support.

[Slapper]

Slapper you are a mentally retarded fuckwad who is completely incapable of rational thought, regardless of what political party you support.

Johnie Cash couldn't have said it better himself! High or not.

[w8tlftr]

I am not a democrat.

I am FAR to the left of the democrats.

So you're a Marxist?

America, with all her faults, probably isn't the country for you. Perhaps Cuba, Venezuela, or China is more your speed?

[Slapper]

So you're a Marxist?

America, with all her faults, probably isn't the country for you.[...]

"Land of the free, home of the brave"? If America is or is not the country for me is for ME to decide. I do not get rid of the things I do not like, I fix them. And in order to fix them you first have to diagnose the problem and the very thing which is causing the problem to us and many people around the world. 

We all have room in this country of OURS. The only difference between America and other autocratic countries is that we export dispair and pain. In the other countries the autocrats take it on their own people... and soon will ours.

[w8tlftr]

"Land of the free, home of the brave"? If America is or is not the country for me is for ME to decide. I do not get rid of the things I do not like, I fix them. And in order to fix them you first have to diagnose the problem and the very thing which is causing the problem to us and many people around the world. 

We all have room in this country of OURS. The only difference between America and other autocratic countries is that we export dispair and pain. In the other countries the autocrats take it on their own people... and soon will ours.

Slapper, I truly think you're kidding yourself if you believe Americans will embrace socialism. It goes against the grain of everything about our free culture and  belief system.

Now while your political opinion is your own and I do respect it (even though I disgree with it) I do question anyones loyalty and love for this country that has very strong left political leanings. Someone doesn't try to change something they love - they accept it. Now, that still doesn't mean that you have to like the way things are now -  you don't (I certainly don't like how things currently are). But you try to restore something to it's former glory versus trying to make it something it's not.

BTW, I also question anyone's loyalty and love for this country that has very strong political right leanings. They're both fascist governments.

[Slapper]

Back to the conversation.

Doesn't anyone here find extremely alarming, as much as Palin's lack of experience I'd say, that McCain has publictly stated that he believes "government is inefficient," yet he is running for office?   Am I the only one who sees this as a MAJOR nono? Imagine a CEO saying "our organization is inefficient" at a shareholder's meeting? He'd be thrown out nose first!

I think that the "government is inefficient" discourse is mere code-talk to Big Business, a way to communicate to them that he is a deregularization-friendly candidate in order to get more funding from Big Business without saying "at the expense of ALL gringos".

Not only IS government efficient, it has laid the basis, the very foundations, from which these massive multinational conglomerates can operate.

Hence not only is McCain wrong for saying something AS STUPID as that, he shouldn't be allowed to run for saying something AS STUPID as that.


 

[w8tlftr]

Back to the conversation.

Doesn't anyone here find extremely alarming, as much as Palin's lack of experience I'd say, that McCain has publictly stated that he believes "government is inefficient," yet he is running for office?  Am I the only one who sees this as a MAJOR nono? Imagine a CEO saying "our organization is inefficient" at a shareholder's meeting? He'd be thrown out nose first!

I think that the "government is inefficient" discourse is mere code-talk to Big Business, a way to communicate to them that he is a deregularization-friendly candidate in order to get more funding from Big Business without saying "at the expense of ALL gringos".

Not only IS government efficient, it has laid the basis, the very foundations, from which these massive multinational conglomerates can operate.

Hence not only is McCain wrong for saying something AS STUPID as that, he shouldn't be allowed to run for saying something AS STUPID as that.

As much as socialists hate to hear this the government is not the answer to all of our problems.

I'll concede the point that the current Republican party is broken and that the asshats running the government are the ones partly responsible for breaking it in the first place.

However, the basic foundation of conservatism is that government should be limited. It has it's uses but it we, as free people, can not turn to it to fix things we have within ourselves to fix.

[Slapper]

Slapper, I truly think you're kidding yourself if you believe Americans will embrace socialism.

And when did I say that America has to embrace socialism? 

It goes against the grain of everything about our free culture and  belief system.

Well, not quite. The pilgrims lived in a communal environment in order to survive. As far as "free culture"... not quite. I mean, you should know better than to post something like that. Were slaves part of our "free culture"? Native Americans? Our past is not glorious, and making it seem like a fairy tale only makes it worst.

Now while your political opinion is your own and I do respect it (even though I disagree with it) I do question anyones loyalty and love for this country that has very strong left political leanings.

And who are you to question anything I do or profess? My loyalty is to the truth and understanding. "Love for your country" is the # 1 killer in the past 100 years. If you are so enamored of our country's "free culture" you wouldn't be criticizing my "leftist" attitude, in fact you'd be commending me for being different from the typical bible-thumbers. You are not, so I seriously doubt that you like the "free culture" you so grandiosely adhere to.

Someone doesn't try to change something they love - they accept it. Now, that still doesn't mean that you have to like the way things are now -  you don't (I certainly don't like how things currently are). But you try to restore something to it's former glory versus trying to make it something it's not.

BTW, I also question anyone's loyalty and love for this country that has very strong political right leanings. They're both fascist governments.

Questioning someone's "loyalty" is total bullshit. This is no mob movie my friend, this is real life. People die because someone in a white mansion in Washington decides to invade a country in order to steal its mineral resources. I do not understand how YOU can call yourself a loyalist when all you do is accept someone's direction without asking yourself "will this make people admire my country"? Your loyalty should always AT ALL TIMES be to the truth, be it here in the states or anywhere else.

Now, you tell me what you think about the republican party and McCain. I will leave what is basically a personal preference as that as PERSONAL.

[Slapper]

As much as socialists hate to hear this the government is not the answer to all of our problems.

Dude, dude, dude! Stop, stop, stop. Time out: I am not a socialist. I am a regular American who wants his government to work for The People.

I'll concede the point that the current Republican party is broken and that the asshats running the government are the ones partly responsible for breaking it in the first place.

That's exactly what I'm saying, but I'm asking you to go a little deeper... why is the republican party broken? And who is in command? I mean, I've read about the republicans and it's like they've become a totally different party.

However, the basic foundation of conservatism is that government should be limited. It has it's uses but it we, as free people, can not turn to it to fix things we have within ourselves to fix.

But that is the key question: "Limited" to what? Who stands to benefit to "limiting" government intrusion? Is there such a thing as government intrusion? What you are saying sounds nice and dandy and all that, but the ones who created the constitution had a different view of the "limits" you keep referring to. Their definition of checks and balances as applied to the government is that there must be a perfect balance, or at least close, between the state and federal government. It's now obvious that the federal government's intrusion is rampant. If this is what you're referring to, I agree. If you're talking about making government smaller so that things like the second invasion of Iraq or the bailing out of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would not happen, I agree. If you're in favor of making the government smaller so that Big Business can go rampant and exploit Americans and other peoples around the globe, I disagree.

Which American are you?

[w8tlftr]

And when did I say that America has to embrace socialism? 

You're the one who said you were FAR to the left of the Democratic party.

That would lead me to believe you'll be unhappy with how things are until Americans (and their government) subscribe to your political point of view.

Well, not quite. The pilgrims lived in a communal environment in order to survive. As far as "free culture"... not quite. I mean, you should know better than to post something like that. Were slaves part of our "free culture"? Native Americans? Our past is not glorious, and making it seem like a fairy tale only makes it worst.

Didn't I say America had her faults? We have a lot of things in our history that we're not fond of. However, our founding fathers also did a lot of things right and, IMO, we've strayed from that path with centralized over-bloated government. When I say "restore" America to it's former glory I mean less centralized federal government, more states rights, and restoring our personal liberties. I don't think living in a nanny state is the answer. People are smart enough to govern themselves.

And who are you to question anything I do or profess? My loyalty is to the truth and understanding. "Love for your country" is the # 1 killer in the past 100 years. If you are so enamored of our country's "free culture" you wouldn't be criticizing my "leftist" attitude, in fact you'd be commending me for being different from the typical bible-thumbers. You are not, so I seriously doubt that you like the "free culture" you so grandiosely adhere to.

I'm a free American with an opinion. I don't care if you don't share it just like I know you don't care if I share yours. We're free to disagree but that doesn't mean I can't challenge you on positions where I think you're wrong.

Questioning someone's "loyalty" is total bullshit. This is no mob movie my friend, this is real life. People die because someone in a white mansion in Washington decides to invade a country in order to steal its mineral resources. I do not understand how YOU can call yourself a loyalist when all you do is accept someone's direction without asking yourself "will this make people admire my country"? Your loyalty should always AT ALL TIMES be to the truth, be it here in the states or anywhere else.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think it's wrong to question anyone's loyalty to their country. I questioned yours because I think it's suspect to want to change something that you love. IMO, that's not what love is. Like I said before, it's one thing to want to restore something and it's another to change it entirely. It's my opinion that you want to change it.

Now, you tell me what you think about the republican party and McCain. I will leave what is basically a personal preference as that as PERSONAL.

I don't like McCain. I don't think anything will significantly change. Sure, he may cut back on spending a little but we'll still borrow billions from China when we have no business doing so. We'll also engage in a foreign policy that intervenes in the business of others then act surprised when we stir up a hornet's nest.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, Slapper. I think that speaks volumes of what I think of McCain and Obama policies.

[w8tlftr]

Dude, dude, dude! Stop, stop, stop. Time out: I am not a socialist. I am a regular American who wants his government to work for The People.

That's great. I want them to work for the people too. However, you did say your FAR to the left of the Democrats. What does that make you then if not a socialist?

That's exactly what I'm saying, but I'm asking you to go a little deeper... why is the republican party broken? And who is in command? I mean, I've read about the republicans and it's like they've become a totally different party.

Globalism and corporate greed. Corporations, who attend BOTH party conventions, have (in my opinion) the 2 party system in their back pocket. They want full control of the planet's resources and they will use Washington to do so. To be fair there are also those on the far left that believe in nationalizing our banking system and oil industries. I think they're no better than the greedy corporations that would gladly fuck us all for a profit. It all comes down to the very few having a monopoly on the resources so many depend on.

But that is the key question: "Limited" to what? Who stands to benefit to "limiting" government intrusion? Is there such a thing as government intrusion? What you are saying sounds nice and dandy and all that, but the ones who created the constitution had a different view of the "limits" you keep referring to. Their definition of checks and balances as applied to the government is that there must be a perfect balance, or at least close, between the state and federal government. It's now obvious that the federal government's intrusion is rampant. If this is what you're referring to, I agree. If you're talking about making government smaller so that things like the second invasion of Iraq or the bailing out of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would not happen, I agree. If you're in favor of making the government smaller so that Big Business can go rampant and exploit Americans and other peoples around the globe, I disagree.

Which American are you?

When I say smaller and limited government I mean all the things you listed.

To quote Bindare, "I want a government that picks up my trash and leaves me the fuck alone."

I don't believe in crap like subsidies for big oil, the automobile industry, corn farmers, what-the-fuck-ever. The government's job is to level the playing field. If a business fails it's because those in charge of them failed. It's not the responsibility of the tax payer to bail them out so the CEOs can get a multi-million dollar severance check.

I believe in states rights. If a state like Massachusetts wants to let gays marry then more power to them. I think they should be allowed to anyways. Who the fuck is the government to stand in the way of two consenting adults? Are we not free citizens?

I can go on and on but I think you get my point.

[Slapper]

You're the one who said you were FAR to the left of the Democratic party.

Right, I am far to the left of the democratic party, but you still fail to explain how that somehow mutates into socialism? 

That would lead me to believe you'll be unhappy with how things are until Americans (and their government) subscribe to your political point of view.

You just answered your own question: That would lead YOU to believe so, not the entire forum (which you have a tendency to speak on behalf of by the way, presumably without having been formally asked). What I'm saying doesn't even resemble socialism. That is what YOU guys are saying, not me, so please STOP! I'm talking about a sort of redistribution, a reshuffling of the money our government spends on other people around the world, be it killing them or funding someone else to kill them or just the money we spend from moving our soldiers from Fuckinstan # 1 to Fuckinstan # 2. I'm not talking about changing the game of "chess," I'm just talking about changing the way "the game" is played.

Didn't I say America had her faults? We have a lot of things in our history that we're not fond of. However, our founding fathers also did a lot of things right and, IMO, we've strayed from that path with centralized over-bloated government. When I say "restore" America to it's former glory I mean less centralized federal government, more states rights, and restoring our personal liberties. I don't think living in a nanny state is the answer. People are smart enough to govern themselves.

And I agree with you on this. I guess that makes you a "socialist".

I'm a free American with an opinion. I don't care if you don't share it just like I know you don't care if I share yours. We're free to disagree but that doesn't mean I can't challenge you on positions where I think you're wrong.

You are free to form and state your opinion indeed. What I do not understand is your stubbornness in trying to distribute "loyal patriot" diplomas as though someone gave you the right to point out who is and who's not a "worthy" American. We are all Americans PERIOD, regardless of your opinion, loyal to our country in all our own ways. Some of us prefer rather more peaceful methods of spreading our patriotism like sponsoring kids' education in Bolivia or working overseas with Doctors Without Borders or just trying to change our government so that our bullets do not end up in other people's heads.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think it's wrong to question anyone's loyalty to their country. I questioned yours because I think it's suspect to want to change something that you love.

How is my desire to see a major change in the way tax money is redistributed unAmerican if I want to bring funds back from Iraq to fund hospitals and shelters (amongst many other things) here in the USA? Can you please explain? Would you rather see us sending the money to Chalabby so that the Iraqi National Congress can get rich at the expense of the American Taxpayer? Is that what a "loyal patriot" does in your opinion? Is a patriot someone who follows the orders of their president without asking any questions?

[24KT]

If people could simply drop the "labels" we like to place on each other and ourselves, and simply "communicate" with each other, we'd find we have much more common ground between us. 


Be Careful of the labels you apply to yourself, as each one is a prison of your own making that forms a boundary that you inevitably will prevent yourself from crossing --Iyanla VanSant

paraphrased cause I can't remember the exact quote

Now who's up for some pizza!   

[Slapper]

That's great. I want them to work for the people too. However, you did say your FAR to the left of the Democrats. What does that make you then if not a socialist?

And would you consider today's democratic party "leftist"? If you do then definitely you must live totally isolated from human beings. When it comes to the spectrum of political systems, today's democratic party is center-right, that is why you see democrats all of a sudden running for the democratic party and viceversa: Because the political ideals are pretty much the same, and the issues that separate them are, as they say, "at the fringes". I mean, there is a clear cut difference in the way each party formulates its policy, but other than that they can pretty much call themselves the Demoblicans or Republicrats and people would not know the difference.

Globalism and corporate greed. Corporations, who attend BOTH party conventions, have (in my opinion) the 2 party system in their back pocket. They want full control of the planet's resources and they will use Washington to do so. To be fair there are also those on the far left that believe in nationalizing our banking system and oil industries. I think they're no better than the greedy corporations that would gladly fuck us all for a profit. It all comes down to the very few having a monopoly on the resources so many depend on.

Well, hold on now! Bush and Cheney are not democrats (and will never be). The Bible/Bomb-for-Profit crowd are an entirely republican phenomena. They must've come from SOMEWHERE. They're like the Taliban: Took over and are making everyone's life miserable. 

When I say smaller and limited government I mean all the things you listed.

To quote Bindare, "I want a government that picks up my trash and leaves me the fuck alone."

I don't believe in crap like subsidies for big oil, the automobile industry, corn farmers, . The government's job is to level the playing field. If a business fails it's because those in charge of them failed. It's not the responsibility of the tax payer to bail them out so the CE Os can get a multimillion dollar severance check.

I believe in states rights. If a state like Massachusetts wants to let gays marry then more power to them. I think they should be allowed to anyways. Who the fuck is the government to stand in the way of two consenting adults? Are we not free citizens?

And yet you grill me as a "unloyal socialist" who wants to change his government for saying essentially the same things...

Wow.

[Slapper]

If people could simply drop the "labels" we like to place on each other and ourselves, and simply "communicate" with each other, we'd find we have much more common ground between us. 


Be Careful of the labels you apply to yourself, as each one is a prison of your own making that forms a boundary that you inevitably will prevent yourself from crossing --Iyanla VanSant

paraphrased cause I can't remember the exact quote

Now who's up for some pizza!   

It's a bodybuilding forum... what did ya expect? Chomsky vs Buckley?

[w8tlftr]

Right, I am far to the left of the democratic party, but you still fail to explain how that somehow mutates into socialism? 

Slapper, you recall that online test you took that provided a bit of insight to what sort of political views you supported. You took the test and posted your results. You recall what yours was? I do. It was socialism. So, what would you call a political view that was FAR LEFT of the democratic party? If it's not socialism or statism I'd love to know what it is. It certainly isn't capitalism.

You just answered your own question: That would lead YOU to believe so, not the entire forum (which you have a tendency to speak on behalf of by the way, presumably without having been formally asked).

I have never said, or presumed, to speak for this entire forum. My opinions are my own. This is a forum where we are free to state our views and opinions and that's what I'm doing - same as you.

What I'm saying doesn't even resemble socialism. That is what YOU guys are saying, not me, so please STOP! I'm talking about a sort of redistribution, a reshuffling of the money our government spends on other people around the world, be it killing them or funding someone else to kill them or just the money we spend from moving our soldiers from Fuckinstan # 1 to Fuckinstan # 2. I'm not talking about changing the game of "chess," I'm just talking about changing the way "the game" is played.

I don't have a problem with the government "reprioritizing" how our tax dollars are used. I don't support the war in Iraq so using that money here to build up our nations infrastructure would be a good start. We're 9 trillion in the red so you'll get no argument from me on cutting back spending.

Now, these are YOUR words: "I am FAR to the left of the democrats." I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here. Please clarify what you mean by that.

And I agree with you on this. I guess that makes you a "socialist".

Until I support statism or redistribution of wealth I'm no socialist. Not by a long shot.

You are free to form and state your opinion indeed. What I do not understand is your stubbornness in trying to distribute "loyal patriot" diplomas as though someone gave you the right to point out who is and who's not a "worthy" American. We are all Americans PERIOD, regardless of your opinion, loyal to our country in all our own ways. Some of us prefer rather more peaceful methods of spreading our patriotism like sponsoring kids' education in Bolivia or working overseas with Doctors Without Borders or just trying to change our government so that our bullets do not end up in other people's heads.

Maybe I wasn't clear so I apologize. What am asking here is why anyone that truly loves their country would want to change it into what it's not. Now, and just for arguments sake, let's say you did want our government to adopt a more socialist/statist position. All I'm saying is that because the United States is historically not a socialist country (although we have been dabbling in it more and more since FDR's administration) if you did love it so much why change it? A person doesn't change something he loves. That's not logical. Restore? Yes. Change? No.

How is my desire to see a major change in the way tax money is redistributed unAmerican if I want to bring funds back from Iraq to fund hospitals and shelters (amongst many other things) here in the USA? Can you please explain? Would you rather see us sending the money to Chalabby so that the Iraqi National Congress can get rich at the expense of the American Taxpayer? Is that what a "loyal patriot" does in your opinion? Is a patriot someone who follows the orders of their president without asking any questions?

Who controls the money? The government via Universal Health Care or the present Health Care System? I have ZERO problem at all with improving our current health care system, public schools, emergency infrastructure, our military, etc.

I just don't share your faith in the way our government spends our money. IMO, they've proven time and time again that it's wasted with little to no accountability. That really is our fault though. We don't hold our elected officials accountable. We just re-elect them because Americans have been successfully programed to vote along party lines and believe everything our party told us.

I used to be that way. I'm happy I woke up. Ventura in 2012 can't happen fast enough for me.