Republicans no longer a viable party?

[ThomasT]

Regarding recent posts on the abuse of entitlements to the poor and disabled, although this does exist, I don't think it's a major problem. The big problem seems to be the legitimate inflating of costs by the healthcare industry, including insurers, practitioners, suppliers, distributors, etc., and the failure of the legislature to do something simple like, say, raising the cap on social security taxes. Also, insofar as it seems that in the future we're going to want people to retire earlier rather than later, then the talk of increasing the retirement age to 70 (for regular SS payment eligibility) would seem to a bad alternative, possibly creating more problems than it solves.

Wrt fraud, there was a rather large industry of fake distributors of medical supplies in the Miami area for a time. However, I think they pretty much cleaned this up, though I don't know.

Anyway, wrt the viability of the Republican party, of course it's viable. It's not going anywhere. It's the more conservative, libertarian oriented half of what might be viewed as the Republican-Democrat megaparty.

 

[mege]

Just some political theatre. The bill to watch for is coming from the senate.

The Senate can start a bill to raise taxes? I guess the Democrats are campaigning on ignoring every facet of the constitution and President Clinton is encourage President Obama to be a dictator, so it could work.

The bill that the House voted on (Cut, Cap, etc) is a political smokescreen for sure, just as the President is 'putting entitlements on the table' (other than the President mentioning this in speeches, there's never been any enumeration) to try and make any debt-celing issues seem like they're all on the GOP. Also notice how noone's talking about the McConnell plan in the media which would grant the President the ability to step the debt celing up while essentially allowing all congress to have deniability because they could do symbolic votes?

This whole debt celing issue has been political theatre. All of them know that fundamental reform is needed in many aspects of the government's operation to truly solve any issues, but it's not politically worthy to do so. So, there'll be some political comprimise which will shove the issue off another few years so we can deal with it then - not really solving anything now. I don't think it's necessary to have a plan to eliminate our federal debt, but paying double-digit percent of the yearly budget on interest seems too much.

So to answer the OP question, again, in the context of the debt-celing/budget issues - the GOP may be losing viability because they want to make hard choices rather than charge our future away. They're making idealogical stands because doing what's popular, they believe, isn't what is right. While I understand what ParticleGrl is saying about now being a good time to borrow to improve infrastructure - that's not happening (from what I understand) in this situation. SS/Medicare are over half of the government's budget and Medicare is only going to be getting larger as more ACA planks fall into place. We're taking on 'bad debt' because borrowing the money now isn't allowing us to save anything in the future, it's just emergency patchwork. I just don't have trust that any additional debt that the government takes on to fund another stimulus is going to have any significant impact because of the inefficiencies already present - it's just passing the buck to the next administration/congress/generation (take your pick).

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-04-13/sweden-sees-surplus-plans-tax-cuts-as-economy-beats-europe.html in prudence for the down economy. I looked and couldn't find a comparative chart of European spending by country over the last 10 years, but the article linked indicates that most countrys have reduced spending (and taxes) over the last few years.

Lastly, on a purely philosophical side of the political parties in the US - I can never totally grasp the consistency of the 'redistribution of wealth' argument that the collectivists/leftists in our country make. Using the redistribution of wealth mentality, isn't it a better thing for the US to have an extremely strong military since we are one of the wealthiest countrys in the world (so it's our job to protect the less wealthy)? How does the redistributive measures work on a global scales - aside from a little bit of food/medical help that gets thrown around by the government, how are we helping other disadvantaged countries? Personally, I think the leftists are unwilling to give from their own pockets (ie: USFG) in the name of social justice - it's too easy to demand it from others in a local perspective.

 

[mege]

Regarding recent posts on the abuse of entitlements to the poor and disabled, although this does exist, I don't think it's a major problem. The big problem seems to be the legitimate inflating of costs by the healthcare industry, including insurers, practitioners, suppliers, distributors, etc., and the failure of the legislature to do something simple like, say, raising the cap on social security taxes. Also, insofar as it seems that in the future we're going to want people to retire earlier rather than later, then the talk of increasing the retirement age to 70 (for regular SS payment eligibility) would seem to a bad alternative, possibly creating more problems than it solves.

Wrt fraud, there was a rather large industry of fake distributors of medical supplies in the Miami area for a time. However, I think they pretty much cleaned this up, though I don't know.

Anyway, wrt the viability of the Republican party, of course it's viable. It's not going anywhere. It's the more conservative, libertarian oriented half of what might be viewed as the Republican-Democrat megaparty.

What worries me about Medicare, in particular, is that there are businesses that can make money off of someone's medicare payments and provide more/better service. If the system is such that a middle-man can make money off of the government service - something is wrong.

I said in another thread that I have a tendency to blame medicare/aid for the current health care situation because of their fixed rates. Unless they're right on the market price, they're going to skew the entire system (as we're seeing) forcing individuals and other insurance companies to pay more.

 

[WhoWee]

You pulled out a subset of symptoms of bipolar to try to build a case for abuse. Someone with bipolar is going to need extensive evaluation by a shrink and medical doctor before ever getting a chance of being put on disability. I'm simply wanting some kind of evidence that these experts are unable to do their job.

my bold
Changing the discussion again? Now you want to discuss the qualifications of the Government workers - or perhaps their motivations?
I Googled SS Disability Bi-polar and returned multiple pages of how to apply for benefits - looks a bit like a new cottage industry? Included in the results was a little gem that happpens to be on point.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/21/i-used-to-be-drunk-but-now-i’m-bipolar/

"“I used to be a drunk, but now I’m bipolar.” A guy who was applying for Social Security disability benefits once said these words, which sum up the problem with this entitlement program. Thursday’s Wall Street Journal article about a “just say yes” Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) in West Virginia who granted benefits to 100% of the people on his case docket during this fiscal year highlights one problem with the program, but its roots are deeper. "

In response to your current question - same link:

"Currently, the only real brakes on a poorly performing judge are the threat of an audit by the inspector general or a reassignment to a hinterlands post with few amenities and lousy airline service. To make disciplining even more difficult, Social Security’s ALJs are unionized — represented by the AFL-CIO for “protection” even though ALJs are civil servants with six-figure incomes and excellent benefits."

I did not know that federal judges were unionized.

 

[mheslep]

I think the fraud mentioned in that link is due to things like charging for services that are never delivered, etc. In other words, it's perpetrated by providers.

Yes, agreed.

The kind of SS fraud WhoWee and I were discussing is "front door" fraud, i.e. bogus claims by individuals who are capable of working but try to scam the system. My (albeit limited) experience with SS is, it's harder to get a bogus claim approved than people think.

Perhaps so, but then in the case of Medicare pretty much only the providers get paid, so to that extent only they can defraud the system.

 

[WhoWee]

Yes, agreed.

Perhaps so, but then in the case of Medicare pretty much on the providers get paid, so to that extent only they can defraud the system.

It's quite possible for Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries to commit fraud. One method is to re-sell prescriptions for pain meds, another is to re-sell medical equipment - like power chairs, another is to share benefits with 3rd parties. If the beneficiary works with a dishonest provider the fraud could be substantial.

 

[mheslep]

It's quite possible for Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries to commit fraud. One method is to re-sell prescriptions for pain meds, another is to re-sell medical equipment - like power chairs, another is to share benefits with 3rd parties. If the beneficiary works with a dishonest provider the fraud could be substantial.

Yes, edited above: 'on-> only'

 

[SixNein]

my bold
Changing the discussion again? Now you want to discuss the qualifications of the Government workers - or perhaps their motivations?
I Googled SS Disability Bi-polar and returned multiple pages of how to apply for benefits - looks a bit like a new cottage industry? Included in the results was a little gem that happpens to be on point.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/21/i-used-to-be-drunk-but-now-i’m-bipolar/

"“I used to be a drunk, but now I’m bipolar.” A guy who was applying for Social Security disability benefits once said these words, which sum up the problem with this entitlement program. Thursday’s Wall Street Journal article about a “just say yes” Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) in West Virginia who granted benefits to 100% of the people on his case docket during this fiscal year highlights one problem with the program, but its roots are deeper. "

A guy "once said these words." This is your evidence?

The WSJ article that your link is referencing did not mention bipolar; instead, it talked about a judge who was approving a high rate of disability claims from a specific lawyer. What was being claimed was not mentioned.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704816604576333682478147922.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

And No I'm not changing the discussion at all. You made the claim that some symptoms could also be claimed by drunks and therefore leads to increase chance for abuse, so show something on medical experts on how they are unable to make a proper diagnosis of someone with bipolar extreme enough to warrant disability.

 

[WhoWee]

A guy "once said these words." This is your evidence?

The WSJ article that your link is referencing did not mention bipolar; instead, it talked about a judge who was approving a high rate of disability claims from a specific lawyer. What was being claimed was not mentioned.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704816604576333682478147922.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

And No I'm not changing the discussion at all. You made the claim that some symptoms could also be claimed by drunks and therefore leads to increase chance for abuse, so show something on medical experts on how they are unable to make a proper diagnosis of someone with bipolar extreme enough to warrant disability.

Now you want to change the discussion again - this time to medical experts? Are you a troll?

The link I posted is an exact match to the possibility of fraud you challenged - it is directly on point. The Government link I posted on the subject in response to turbo discusses the (Government reported) problem of fraud and the legal remedies available. Where is the confusion?

 

[Alfi]

Now you want to change the discussion again - this time to medical experts? Are you a troll?

The link I posted is an exact match to the possibility of fraud you challenged - it is directly on point. The Government link I posted on the subject in response to turbo discusses the (Government reported) problem of fraud and the legal remedies available. Where is the confusion?

The topic is : Re: Republicans no longer a viable party?
- medical fraud is not exactly on topic. Where is the confusion?


Is it safe to say that the Republicans are not viable as a party as far as the next presidential election?
There is no challenge to Obama winning a second term, as I see things so far.

 

[WhoWee]

The topic is : Re: Republicans no longer a viable party?
- medical fraud is not exactly on topic. Where is the confusion?


Is it safe to say that the Republicans are not viable as a party as far as the next presidential election?
There is no challenge to Obama winning a second term, as I see things so far.

I would prefer to not respond to the off-topic questions. The challenge to Obama is a Republican Party united around this spending debate and a willingness to put specifics on the table. Agree with them or not, McConnell and Coburn are showing leadership and the House Republicans have moved legislation forward for a balanced budget amendment - more leadership.

 

[WhoWee]

I would prefer to not respond to the off-topic questions. The challenge to Obama is a Republican Party united around this spending debate and a willingness to put specifics on the table. Agree with them or not, McConnell and Coburn are showing leadership and the House Republicans have moved legislation forward for a balanced budget amendment - more leadership.

As a follow up point - the White House Press Secretary says the President is showing leadership by not proposing a plan?

 

[turbo]

Is it safe to say that the Republicans are not viable as a party as far as the next presidential election?
There is no challenge to Obama winning a second term, as I see things so far.

The GOP is making it their prime objective to paint Obama as a failure and deny him a second term. They seem quite unified in this goal. The problem for Congressional Republicans is that they have strong internal divisions, and whoever votes to "raise taxes" by rolling back give-aways made in past years will find their seats in jeopardy. Grover Norquist and his minions will recruit Tea-Party candidates to try to knock them out in their primaries. Thanks to Citizens United, they probably can do it, simply by swamping the air-waves with negative ads targeting the incumbents.

Is the Republican party viable? IMO, not in its current configuration. After they tear themselves apart (and they are headed in that direction) and convince Independents that they cannot govern effectively, due to all their intransigence, the Democrats will probably take back the House and make gains in the Senate. David Brooks is no idiot, and he sees the handwriting on the wall.

 

[WhoWee]

To be fair - President Obama does plan to raise taxes after the 2012 election - not now while the economy is strugggling - to pay for his spending.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45fHcmMjmPc&feature=related

By contrast, the Republican leadership is trying to slow the spending so the taxes don't have to be increased in the out years beginning 2013 - doing something now (Republican plan) seems more like leadership to me.

 

[turbo]

To be fair - President Obama does plan to raise taxes after the 2012 election - not now while the economy is strugggling - to pay for his spending.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45fHcmMjmPc&feature=related

Again, Congress passes spending bills, not the President. If all current spending is Obama's please show how that is true. If the Dems manage to roll back the Bush tax cuts and give-aways to special interests, that is is not a bad thing. Tax-cuts for the wealthy and special deductions for special interests are spending in the purest sense of the word. Want to cut spending? Cut tax-breaks for the wealthy, cut subsidies for ethanol, energy companies, agri-giants, and other entities with strong lobbies. All of that is spending, and it pulls taxes from the middle-class and shoves the money up to the rich.

 

[WhoWee]

Again, Congress passes spending bills, not the President. If all current spending is Obama's please show how that is true. If the Dems manage to roll back the Bush tax cuts and give-aways to special interests, that is is not a bad thing. Tax-cuts for the wealthy and special deductions for special interests are spending in the purest sense of the word. Want to cut spending? Cut tax-breaks for the wealthy, cut subsidies for ethanol, energy companies, agri-giants, and other entities with strong lobbies. All of that is spending, and it pulls taxes from the middle-class and shoves the money up to the rich.

Let's be accurate regarding the "Bush tax cuts" - are they not more accurately described as the tax cuts initiated by Bush - then renewed by Obama - now blamed on Bush again (tax cuts)? I don't seem to remember President Obama referring to them as the "Bush tax cuts" when he was taking credit for their renewal - do you?

 

[WhoWee]

The results of this study might indicate the Republican Party is still viable?
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/07/20/shock-study-us-flag-only-boosts-gop

"Just a brief exposure to an image of the American flag shifts voters, even Democrats, to Republican beliefs, attitudes and voting behavior even though most don't believe it will impact their politics, according to a new two-year study just published in the scholarly Psychological Science.

What's more, according to three authors from the University Chicago, Cornell University and Hebrew University, the impact had staying power.

"A single exposure to an American flag resulted in a significant increase in participants' Republican voting intentions, voting behavior, political beliefs, and implicit and explicit attitudes, with some effects lasting 8 months," the study found. "These results constitute the first evidence that nonconscious priming effects from exposure to a national flag can bias the citizenry toward one political party and can have considerable durability.""

 

[DevilsAvocado]

These endless distractions that you and others have brought up are all off-topic. Are the Republicans an actual viable political party?

Did anyone ever present a reason to think otherwise? If so I missed it in the distractions.

Kudos Hurkyl, that’s a funny and viable question indeed.

We don’t know what’s going to happen yet, but if worst things happen, I can only tell you how it looks from a European perspective (maybe you guys don’t care...):

=

+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9bvreW08X0
+

+

+

+

+

Gadsden flag
+

Second Revolution flag
=
Total Mess + the A-bomb

This gang of Noodle-brains makes the monkeys of the NSDAP look like a bunch of Nobel laureates in comparison. Of course, that’s in a European perspective, and we might be missing something over here...

But we all wonder what the heck is going on... you guys voted twice for a man who’s being characterized as having the "IQ of an eggplant", who brag about never have read a book, who is a 'sober alcoholic', who started a costly war against the wrong country, and who almost drove the world economy into collapse.

And now (in worst scenario), you’re going to vote on Tea & Noodle-brains?

Isn’t one "eggplant" enough for a hundred years or so?

The mere fact that you now have something called the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Party_USA" is, to me, a strong indication that something is terribly wrong:

The organization's mission states that it is based on the underlying principle that the government is "not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans."
...
A key difference is in our emphasis on the democratic process, on respectful and civil engagement with one another and with our elected officials. In the current climate, too many Americans are afraid to participate, and find the process itself too alienating, because it is dominated by people with extreme opinions and extreme tactics. It's hard to speak up when others in the room are screaming. So in the end, we may want some of the same things, but we [are] hoping our journey getting there will be very different.

​

But please don’t take this wrong, we all love you and we do want you to stay #1 for many years still (China is cool, but we don’t understand the language, and why they’re cutting CAT-6 cables...).


... WE ARE WORRIED!


P.S. What happened to this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdA1ikkoEc

 

[WhoWee]

We don’t know what’s going to happen yet, but if worst things happen, I can only tell you how it looks from a European perspective (maybe you guys don’t care...):

my bold
Probably not?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

WhoWee, I’m not surprised about you showing this 'global attitude', but how about the rest of the 308,745,537?

 

[WhoWee]

WhoWee, I’m not surprised about you showing this 'global attitude', but how about the rest of the 308,745,537?

You did pose the question.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

 

[ThomasT]

This gang of Noodle-brains makes the monkeys of the NSDAP look like a bunch of Nobel laureates in comparison. Of course, that’s in a European perspective, and we might be missing something over here...

But we all wonder what the heck is going on... you guys voted twice for a man who’s being characterized as having the "IQ of an eggplant", who brag about never have read a book, who is a 'sober alcoholic', who started a costly war against the wrong country, and who almost drove the world economy into collapse.

And now (in worst scenario), you’re going to vote on Tea & Noodle-brains?

Isn’t one "eggplant" enough for a hundred years or so?

Hi DA. Another entertaining post. Here's one of my favorite George W. Bush quotations (I'll get to the topic momentarily):

Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.

Wrt the topic, it's precisely because the American people elected (sort of) George W. Bush to his first term and then to a second term that the current incarnation of the Republican party remains potentially viable wrt the upcoming election imo. I think they're probably not going to win, but who knows. This is, after all, America. The Coffee Party?

 

[russ_watters]

Let's be accurate regarding the "Bush tax cuts" - are they not more accurately described as the tax cuts initiated by Bush - then renewed by Obama - now blamed on Bush again (tax cuts)? I don't seem to remember President Obama referring to them as the "Bush tax cuts" when he was taking credit for their renewal - do you?

You forgot to point out the factually inaccurate characterization of the Bush tax cuts as "tax cuts for the wealthy". The reality is that the tax cuts were for everyone, but Obama wants to cancel the tax cuts for the wealthy while keeping the tax cuts for everyone else. In other words, Obama wants to repackage them as tax cuts for everyone except the wealthy.

 

[russ_watters]

my bold
Probably not?

If he doesn't understand the greatness of "The Coffee Party", I'd say yeah, probably not.

WhoWee, I’m not surprised about you showing this 'global attitude', but how about the rest of the 308,745,537?

I'll tell you what: when Europe votes the President of the US to hold the title President of the World, or alternately, stops depending on the President of the US to be the President of the World, I'll start caring what they think about who we elect. Deal?

I found it to be hilarious that people thought it mattered that foreigners liked Obama. Foreigners have completely different desires for the US's direction than Americans do or even could!

 

[WhoWee]

You forgot to point out the factually inaccurate characterization of the Bush tax cuts as "tax cuts for the wealthy". The reality is that the tax cuts were for everyone, but Obama wants to cancel the tax cuts for the wealthy while keeping the tax cuts for everyone else. In other words, Obama wants to repackage them as tax cuts for everyone except the wealthy.

Good point. I do wonder how an elimination of the mortgage interest deduction might be described by the President?

 

[turbo]

Good point. I do wonder how an elimination of the mortgage interest deduction might be described by the President?

Let's see. The elimination of of the mortgage deduction on $1 Milllion-dollar homes might not be received too badly by tea-partiers, provided that they are actually capable of paying attention and they aspire to actually owning a multi-million-dollar house (realistically). The repeal of the mortgage deduction for $500,000 SECOND homes should not be rejected, either, provided any of those people can parse the information and hope to own such an expensive second home. Let's get real, people!

The GOP is acting on a field so far removed from normal voters that it is a wonder that they can get anybody elected.

 

[WhoWee]

Let's see. The elimination of of the mortgage deduction on $1 Milllion-dollar homes might not be received too badly by tea-partiers, provided that they are actually capable of paying attention and they aspire to actually owning a multi-million-dollar house (realistically). The repeal of the mortgage deduction for $500,000 SECOND homes should not be rejected, either, provided any of those people can parse the information and hope to own such an expensive second home. Let's get real, people!

The GOP is acting on a field so far removed from normal voters that it is a wonder that they can get anybody elected.

What makes you think your (or a friend or family member) mortgage deduction won't be taken away - and why shouldn't it - if it's ok for someone that signed their name to a $1million mortgage in good faith?

 

[russ_watters]

What makes you think your (or a friend or family member) mortgage deduction won't be taken away - and why shouldn't it - if it's ok for someone that signed their name to a $1million mortgage in good faith?

I think you missed the point: any tax can have a minimum eligibility requirement. While we talk about 'what happens if we eliminate the mortgage interest deduction', others may be thinking 'what happens if we cap the mortgage interest deduction in order to create a new stealth tax on the well-off.'

 

[SW VandeCarr]

=
Total Mess + the A-bomb

This gang of Noodle-brains makes the monkeys of the NSDAP look like a bunch of Nobel laureates in comparison. Of course, that’s in a European perspective, and we might be missing something over here.

..

Actually, didn't Werner Heisenberg win a Nobel?

But we all wonder what the heck is going on... you guys voted twice for a man who’s being characterized as having the "IQ of an eggplant", who brag about never have read a book, who is a 'sober alcoholic', who started a costly war against the wrong country, and who almost drove the world economy into collapse.

Yes, but where can you find another eggplant that can cut brush in the hot Texas sun? And you forgot to mention Dick Cheney's "Deficits don't matter".

Isn’t one "eggplant" enough for a hundred years or so?

A hundred years?? That's beyond comprehension. I'm lucky if I can remember what happened last week.

The mere fact that you now have something called the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Party_USA" is, to me, a strong indication that something is terribly wrong:

Again. I don't understand. Can you put noodles in coffee too?

The organization's mission states that it is based on the underlying principle that the government is "not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans."​

Who wrote that commie propaganda? Hang 'em!
...

A key difference is in our emphasis on the democratic process, on respectful and civil engagement with one another and with our elected officials. In the current climate, too many Americans are afraid to participate, and find the process itself too alienating, because it is dominated by people with extreme opinions and extreme tactics. It's hard to speak up when others in the room are screaming. So in the end, we may want some of the same things, but we [are] hoping our journey getting there will be very different.

More seditious commie crap trying to poison our minds with rational thoughts.

But please don’t take this wrong, we all love you and we do want you to stay #1 for many years still (China is cool, but we don’t understand the language, and why they’re cutting CAT-6 cables...).

How can you love us when we hate each other in the finest American tradition?

... WE ARE WORRIED!

No need to worry. Just acquire a taste for noodles and eggplant.

P.S. What happened to this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdA1ikkoEc [/QUOTE]

Who's he? Sounds like some foreigner with a funny accent trying to tell us what to do.

EDIT: By the way, Michele Bachmann is a tax lawyer who worked for the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Anyone who immerses themselves in US tax law too long can be excused if they longer can think rationally. They're lucky if they can think at all.​

 

[SixNein]

Now you want to change the discussion again - this time to medical experts? Are you a troll?

The link I posted is an exact match to the possibility of fraud you challenged - it is directly on point. The Government link I posted on the subject in response to turbo discusses the (Government reported) problem of fraud and the legal remedies available. Where is the confusion?

um hum

You pulled out a subset of symptoms of bipolar to try to build a case for abuse. Someone with bipolar is going to need extensive evaluation by a shrink and medical doctor before ever getting a chance of being put on disability. I'm simply wanting some kind of evidence that these experts are unable to do their job.

to which you reply: "Now you want to discuss the qualifications of the Government workers - or perhaps their motivations? "

And again I state:

You made the claim that some symptoms could also be claimed by drunks and therefore leads to increase chance for abuse, so show something on medical experts on how they are unable to make a proper diagnosis of someone with bipolar extreme enough to warrant disability.

And now I'm changing the discussion again ? !

I'm simply looking for you to defend your argument that there is an increased chance for abuse for bipolar disability.

 

[WhoWee]

um hum



to which you reply: "Now you want to discuss the qualifications of the Government workers - or perhaps their motivations? "

And again I state:



And now I'm changing the discussion again ? !

I'm simply looking for you to defend your argument that there is an increased chance for abuse for bipolar disability.

I really don't care to respond to any more trolling. Let's get back on topic.

 

[mege]

The GOP is acting on a field so far removed from normal voters that it is a wonder that they can get anybody elected.

Or maybe the average collectivist is so far removed that they see even the slightest shift towards liberty and it scares them?

I find it quite odd that the left is trying to paint the GOP as extremists, as if the left's policies are so centrist. There are some seemingly crazy conservative ideas out there right now, but they're predictable and principled. Are taxes realistically going to be eliminated? No. Then why is it reasonable, in that same vein, that we make our taxes even more progressive? Now, I agree with one of your other posts - the tax code sucks. It needs to be revamped to eliminate the loopholes. But taxes aren't enough to get us out of this hole. Even if revenues went up a few percentage points that won't come close to putting a dent into the extra 25% that federal spending has ballooned over the past 2 years. In a related note - there's an interesting article about federal employees and how http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/07/debt-talks-continue-feds-are-hiring-and-never-firing . Are the government's hiring practices so secure that they only let go of 1/6th of the employees compared to private sector jobs?

Part of why I identify with the GOP, and TEA Party, in basic principle, is that when the government expands, it's almost impossible to shrink. What's an example of a major federal program which has just stopped existing? There have been a few name changes and revisions, but whenever a federal job/entity gets created it's generally around for good. That's a definite problem as time goes on - what's the leftist solution? Tax the rich! Even that will only work so long - what happens when there's no more rich to tax and your poor are still poor? Basically everyone is poor then, is that the leftist utopia? I hope not, and I will vote and campaign against it. I still stand by my opinion that if gay marriage and abortions were non-issues the GOP would win in landslides, over and over. Basically, in my mind the collectivists attempt to monopolize feminist ideals and present contradictory economic policys to attempt to rally their base whole heartedly against the GOP.

Finally there's the point of hate and how I feel many of the left have lost their perspective. Now my opinion may be a little slanted, but I cannot find any attempts by conservatives to silence liberals. How many petitions have circulated the internet, however, to 'ban conservative talk radio'. Where is the hate coming from? I don't feel any animosity towards political opposites, but turbo-1 in your ranting post about a slow driver - you made sure to point out that they had TEA Party bumper stickers (and I'm guessing you were seeing red because of it). Now, maybe this opinion is a bit hypocritical and I admit that - but it still doesn't mean I hate those of the opposite political affiliation. There are some that are posting in this thread which have some 'GOP ran over my dog' type hate in them, which is hardly productive - but to me it reinforces that many of the lefts policies are made with the heart instead of the head. This type of reaction is why I feel the argument that the 'GOP has become extreme' is flawed - it's purely emotional and no real basis outside of 'a feeling'.

Unfortunately, the media takes hold of feelings more than it does facts - 'real life has a left slant' when you ignore reason and fact. Now there is a resurgance of intellectualism in an attempt to 'prove' the GOP wrong. It seems I see, from my collectivist friends on facebook, a new 'fact' weekly about how the GOP is biggoted and hateful. (my favorite was a survey of a bunch of folks from mississippi - one of the questions was regarding interracial marriage, 50% self-identified republicans thought it should not be allowed - the democrat data was mysteriously missing for that sub-question (but was present for other portions of the survey results). Of course the leftists immediately draw the conclusion that 'GOP = racist' rather than a more general 'southern more likely to be racist' which is probably the truth).

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Or maybe the average collectivist is so far removed that they see even the slightest shift towards liberty and it scares them?

I find it quite odd that the left is trying to paint the GOP as extremists, as if the left's policies are so centrist. There are some seemingly crazy conservative ideas out there right now, but they're predictable and principled. Are taxes realistically going to be eliminated? No. Then why is it reasonable, in that same vein, that we make our taxes even more progressive? Now, I agree with one of your other posts - the tax code sucks. It needs to be revamped to eliminate the loopholes. But taxes aren't enough to get us out of this hole. Even if revenues went up a few percentage points that won't come close to putting a dent into the extra 25% that federal spending has ballooned over the past 2 years. In a related note - there's an interesting article about federal employees and how http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/07/debt-talks-continue-feds-are-hiring-and-never-firing . Are the government's hiring practices so secure that they only let go of 1/6th of the employees compared to private sector jobs?

Part of why I identify with the GOP, and TEA Party, in basic principle, is that when the government expands, it's almost impossible to shrink. What's an example of a major federal program which has just stopped existing? There have been a few name changes and revisions, but whenever a federal job/entity gets created it's generally around for good. That's a definite problem as time goes on - what's the leftist solution? Tax the rich! Even that will only work so long - what happens when there's no more rich to tax and your poor are still poor? Basically everyone is poor then, is that the leftist utopia? I hope not, and I will vote and campaign against it. I still stand by my opinion that if gay marriage and abortions were non-issues the GOP would win in landslides, over and over. Basically, in my mind the collectivists attempt to monopolize feminist ideals and present contradictory economic policys to attempt to rally their base whole heartedly against the GOP.

Finally there's the point of hate and how I feel many of the left have lost their perspective. Now my opinion may be a little slanted, but I cannot find any attempts by conservatives to silence liberals. How many petitions have circulated the internet, however, to 'ban conservative talk radio'. Where is the hate coming from? I don't feel any animosity towards political opposites, but turbo-1 in your ranting post about a slow driver - you made sure to point out that they had TEA Party bumper stickers (and I'm guessing you were seeing red because of it). Now, maybe this opinion is a bit hypocritical and I admit that - but it still doesn't mean I hate those of the opposite political affiliation. There are some that are posting in this thread which have some 'GOP ran over my dog' type hate in them, which is hardly productive - but to me it reinforces that many of the lefts policies are made with the heart instead of the head. This type of reaction is why I feel the argument that the 'GOP has become extreme' is flawed - it's purely emotional and no real basis outside of 'a feeling'.

Unfortunately, the media takes hold of feelings more than it does facts - 'real life has a left slant' when you ignore reason and fact. Now there is a resurgance of intellectualism in an attempt to 'prove' the GOP wrong. It seems I see, from my collectivist friends on facebook, a new 'fact' weekly about how the GOP is biggoted and hateful. (my favorite was a survey of a bunch of folks from mississippi - one of the questions was regarding interracial marriage, 50% self-identified republicans thought it should not be allowed - the democrat data was mysteriously missing for that sub-question (but was present for other portions of the survey results). Of course the leftists immediately draw the conclusion that 'GOP = racist' rather than a more general 'southern more likely to be racist' which is probably the truth).

In all of that you did nothing to address Michelle Bachman's claim that there is no need to increase the debt ceiling. The link in the op was responding to this position and the unrealistic and absurd proposition that the tea partiers can bully the rest of the country into a fanatical policy. They would bring calamity to the economy. THAT is why the Republicans are unfit to govern.

Perhaps one of their Presidential candidates is fit to hold office - Romney. The rest are either fringe [eg Bachman] or could never get nominated [eg Huntsman].

 

[SixNein]

Or maybe the average collectivist is so far removed that they see even the slightest shift towards liberty and it scares them?

I find it quite odd that the left is trying to paint the GOP as extremists, as if the left's policies are so centrist. There are some seemingly crazy conservative ideas out there right now, but they're predictable and principled. Are taxes realistically going to be eliminated? No. Then why is it reasonable, in that same vein, that we make our taxes even more progressive? Now, I agree with one of your other posts - the tax code sucks. It needs to be revamped to eliminate the loopholes. But taxes aren't enough to get us out of this hole. Even if revenues went up a few percentage points that won't come close to putting a dent into the extra 25% that federal spending has ballooned over the past 2 years. In a related note - there's an interesting article about federal employees and how http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/07/debt-talks-continue-feds-are-hiring-and-never-firing . Are the government's hiring practices so secure that they only let go of 1/6th of the employees compared to private sector jobs?

Part of why I identify with the GOP, and TEA Party, in basic principle, is that when the government expands, it's almost impossible to shrink. What's an example of a major federal program which has just stopped existing? There have been a few name changes and revisions, but whenever a federal job/entity gets created it's generally around for good. That's a definite problem as time goes on - what's the leftist solution? Tax the rich! Even that will only work so long - what happens when there's no more rich to tax and your poor are still poor? Basically everyone is poor then, is that the leftist utopia? I hope not, and I will vote and campaign against it. I still stand by my opinion that if gay marriage and abortions were non-issues the GOP would win in landslides, over and over. Basically, in my mind the collectivists attempt to monopolize feminist ideals and present contradictory economic policys to attempt to rally their base whole heartedly against the GOP.

Finally there's the point of hate and how I feel many of the left have lost their perspective. Now my opinion may be a little slanted, but I cannot find any attempts by conservatives to silence liberals. How many petitions have circulated the internet, however, to 'ban conservative talk radio'. Where is the hate coming from? I don't feel any animosity towards political opposites, but turbo-1 in your ranting post about a slow driver - you made sure to point out that they had TEA Party bumper stickers (and I'm guessing you were seeing red because of it). Now, maybe this opinion is a bit hypocritical and I admit that - but it still doesn't mean I hate those of the opposite political affiliation. There are some that are posting in this thread which have some 'GOP ran over my dog' type hate in them, which is hardly productive - but to me it reinforces that many of the lefts policies are made with the heart instead of the head. This type of reaction is why I feel the argument that the 'GOP has become extreme' is flawed - it's purely emotional and no real basis outside of 'a feeling'.

Unfortunately, the media takes hold of feelings more than it does facts - 'real life has a left slant' when you ignore reason and fact. Now there is a resurgance of intellectualism in an attempt to 'prove' the GOP wrong. It seems I see, from my collectivist friends on facebook, a new 'fact' weekly about how the GOP is biggoted and hateful. (my favorite was a survey of a bunch of folks from mississippi - one of the questions was regarding interracial marriage, 50% self-identified republicans thought it should not be allowed - the democrat data was mysteriously missing for that sub-question (but was present for other portions of the survey results). Of course the leftists immediately draw the conclusion that 'GOP = racist' rather than a more general 'southern more likely to be racist' which is probably the truth).

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124906766
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/041609_extremism.pdf