The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

As a counterpoint, would you call many of the Dem supporters a secular Taliban?

Edit: Should I start a new thread on September 1? I was thinking of an one thread per month.
Tentative titles:
Try to remember, that time in September
The October Surprise
(Nov is still on the drawing board)

It's looking like we'll hit 1000 posts by Friday.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Though you already have the "remember" idea for Sept, I'd go with, "Remember, Remember the 6th of November..."

If you associate remember with ANY month, it's the following:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4Sv-XEq7S0U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Old Pio]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Uh, you really believe this?

We could use a little more "obsession with crime and punishment" in Chicago, don't you think?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

I do realize that. I've been shot at by both sides in the label wars.
I also think that the GOP is damaging itself by its inflexibility on immigration, military spending, and other things that push it further toward extremism than toward the center. Especially in the house. I'd seriously vote for Jeb Bush for prez who is saying a lot I agree with on moderating these issues.
William Saletan, undeniably a liberal, says a lot I agree with on the current debate.

The "you're calling us all far right" cry is also used as a convenient way of diverting attention from the claim that there is a far right and it has gained tremendous power in the mainstream RNC.

Very few (perhaps a half dozen) of the posters here qualify as "far right." However, the party Republicans throw their support behind has at the least countenanced and in many cases actually embraced radical far right doctrine and rhetoric. People can disavow it as "not where they stand" all they want, but if they're voting for it they're certainly encouraging it.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Uh, you really believe this?

I do.

The "you're calling us all far right" cry is also used as a convenient way of diverting attention from the claim that there is a far right and it has gained tremendous power in the mainstream RNC.

Very few (perhaps a half dozen) of the posters here qualify as "far right." However, the party they throw their support behind has at the least countenanced and in many cases actually embraced radical far right doctrine and rhetoric. People can disavow it as "not where they stand" all they want, but if they're voting for it they're certainly encouraging it.

I also 100% agree with this take.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

The "you're calling us all far right" cry is also used as a convenient way of diverting attention from the claim that there is a far right and it has gained tremendous power in the mainstream RNC.

Very few (perhaps a half dozen) of the posters here qualify as "far right."

Now you know why we say it. This is one of the worst parts about the lessor of two evils, in that we get lumped into one of two groups. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some issues where you would agree with the other side, regardless of party lines (and I don't trust your test results at all, because looking at them, it makes me think that you said to yourself, "What would the Democrats do?" and selected that).

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

The "you're calling us all far right" cry is also used as a convenient way of diverting attention from the claim that there is a far right and it has gained tremendous power in the mainstream RNC.

This is the point I meant to agree with. The longer we allow things like the weird pledge from what's his name Grover to slide along, or talk of marriage amendments in the constitution, etc. the more every party member and even Republican voter is earning the right to be called an extremist.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

I do.



I also 100% agree with this take.

Stunning revelation.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Stunning revelation.

Robots do not create revelations.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

This is the point I meant to agree with. The longer we allow things like the weird pledge from what's his name Grover to slide along, or talk of marriage amendments in the constitution, etc. the more every party member and even Republican voter is earning the right to be called an extremist.

And here we thought "guilt by association" died with Tailgunner Joe.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Now you know why we say it. This is one of the worst parts about the lessor of two evils, in that we get lumped into one of two groups. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some issues where you would agree with the other side, irregardless of party lines (and I don't trust your test results at all, because looking at them, it makes me think that you said to yourself, "What would the Democrats do?" and selected that).

irregardless?

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

And here we thought "guilt by association" died with Tailgunner Joe.

I'm having a MUCH harder time calling Romney the "lesser of two evils" than I did with McCain. So many of these issues I've mentioned should be common sense to any "conservative" candidate, that I'm frustrated with all of them.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

irregardless?

There's a classic SAT question.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

I do.

Wasn't asking you.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Wasn't asking you.

If that mattered, there would be no Cafe.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

But you need to realize that anyone supporting conservative causes is typically labeled far right around here. Frankly, to most liberals I don't think they really believe there is a non-far right. You don't agree with them and you're automatically radical by definition.

I think that conservatives do themselves a disservice by not shouting down the radicals at the far spectrum of their ideology. What do you expect people to think when the only message we hear is that of the far right?

Blame the media all you want, but here's what we've seen lately:


You could see how trapped Boehner looked when the tea-baggers and Cantor had him by the bags over the past two years. He was scared though, and chickened out and let the extreme be the voice, even though he obviously wanted to cut some sort of a deal.

Dick Luger among many others gets primary-ed because he isn't far enough to the right.

State legislatures pass numerous laws restricting birth control and mandating invasive, non-neccesary medical procedures for women seeking abortions along with other social issues. Somebody (majorities) voted those people into power.

Akin will still get a significant number of votes, even though he's a whack-job.

The continuing traction that birthers get.

Trying to pass constitutional amendments to outlaw gay marriage. Really? This is worth an amendment to our Constitution?

Voter ID - don't try to justify this. It's only for suppression. You'd have to be an idiot to not see what the motivation for this was regardless of whether you agree with the policy.

Having candidates for the Presidency of the United States of America declare that they don't believe in evolution. Do they really believe that or are they scared of their base? Either answer to that is bad.

Having candidates for the Presidency of the United States of America declare that they don't believe in global warming. (Of course many have adjusted this to "man made" global waring in the face of the evidence. )



These are just a few examples of what many would see as extreme behavior or beliefs. If this is only a small, vocal portion of your party doing these things, then why doesn't the majority take the reigns back? Isn't it possible to be a conservative without believing that the world is only 6000 years old? Of course it is, but no one will stand up to that segment publicly for fear of getting themselves primary-ed.

I think the list of fascist factors that was shared fits the far right quite well and unfortunately, it appears that the far right is formulating your party's message and policy.

People will say that Republicans need to stick together right now despite their differences in order to defeat Obama, but I've seen no evidence that the less extreme (there don't appear to be moderates any more) elements of the GOP will ever actually stand up to the far right, even should they gain power.

That's why I can't ever see voting for a Republican again, or at least right now, even though I very nearly despise the typical weak-kneed Democratic politician - who get very little done. But I'd rather have little get done than far too much of the wrong things done.

Now some will undoubtedly say that conservatism does not equal being a Republican and that I'm over-generalizing, but based upon voting in congress and general public voting in elections, they are effectively interchangeable.

Look, I don't doubt that there are reasonable Republicans, and lots of them, but they aren't currently calling the shots. Not standing up to the extremists is essentially the same as agreeing with them. That's why you get painted with broad strokes.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

The "you're calling us all far right" cry is also used as a convenient way of diverting attention from the claim that there is a far right and it has gained tremendous power in the mainstream RNC.

Very few (perhaps a half dozen) of the posters here qualify as "far right." However, the party Republicans throw their support behind has at the least countenanced and in many cases actually embraced radical far right doctrine and rhetoric. People can disavow it as "not where they stand" all they want, but if they're voting for it they're certainly encouraging it.

One can insert "left" for "right" and say the exact same thing. Just more partisan bla, bla, bla.

I'm not saying you don't believe it. Just that you believe it because it fits your partisan viewpoint to say it about the right rather than the left.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

irregardless?

This is what happens when you pick up the bad habits of poor spellers at USCHO and when you work in a company that consistently makes up words.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

I'm having a MUCH harder time calling Romney the "lesser of two evils" than I did with McCain. So many of these issues I've mentioned should be common sense to any "conservative" candidate, that I'm frustrated with all of them.

Perhaps you could watch the CD of "The Collected Speeches of Sheila Jackson Lee." Or review Cynthia McKinney's various excretions. That might put some of these matters in perspective.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2012 Presidential Election Part I - The guns of August

Trying to pass constitutional amendments to outlaw gay marriage. Really? This is worth an amendment to our Constitution?

Was Amendment 16 worth it? How about 18? Amending the Constitution is the only way that you will, without question, get anywhere with specific laws. The key phrase is "without question".