Are Republicans Crazy?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Sloth wrote:
From what I can tell, the tea parties are definitely outside of, and greater than, the GoP. There may be a good many GoPers supporting it (since it nicely coincides against Obama’s agenda). However, just from my reading, and catching footage on the news, it isn’t about the GoP at all. In fact, I’ve seen both parties catching hell from attendees. Many of the folks seem to be Libertarian and disgruntled Conservatives (the Ron Paul/Const. Party variety). Hardly GoP operatives or cheerleaders.

Seems to me the movement isn’t about the GoP. It’s about an underlying philosophy of governance. These are small government folks, angry they’ve been cheated out of the inheritance our founders left us.

The nanny state, the debt/deficit, talks of nationalization, patriot act, tax burdens, the cost of our foreign policy, etc… They have real grievances against the central government. This of course doesn’t sit well with socialists and welfare state lickspittles, so they attempt to reduce these gatherings of freedom minded citizens to nothing more than a GoP rally.

This is the only really good legitamate reply to the OP topic and not one response to it, instead the two party warriors are going back and forth about shit they can’t control, and no one in power really cares about. Instead they could stop areguing against eachother and look at what the fuck real people are DOING about big government. But alas, most people would rather talk and complain or cheer than get out and do work to actually effect change.

The Tea Party has nothing to do with GOP, in fact it is just as much against the modern GOP as it is against the Democrats. It is entirely a libertarian/small government/campaign for liberty/info warriors etc… movement. All of these small groups are starting to band together sure there are differences, some think the govenment did 9-11, others think they know who did but are covering it up, and still others don’t believe the government did anything other than drop the ball. Some people like some social programs, others want a harder society with less safety nets and handouts. The bottom line is that more and more people are listening and participating in a movement in some way, that is sending a message to The people running this here ship, WE DON"T WANT BIG GOVERNMENT TELLING US HOW TO LIVE OUR LIVES AND SPENDING OUR MONEY TO FIT THIER INTERESTS. It’s the same message the colonies sent to the royal family during the origional tea party. For people to not make the connection is stupid, and for people to be ridiculed for doing something so patriotic that we are tought these men WERE AMERICA these are the people who built our contry with thier blood sweat and tears and now if we act like them we are crazy? Fuck these people and you idiots who can’t see through thier web. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
/lecture

V

good post.

aside from the ironies of calling them modern day tea partys…

even if mccain won, and the republicans controlled congress. i imagine these would have happened for the same exact reasons.[/quote]

I doubt it. Or, if they would have happened, they would have been much smaller. Fox currently sponsors these events which is going to bring out people. Had McCain won, fox wouldn’t really be supporting it I don’t think.

'Course this thread is about more than the tea-parties. If the tea parties really aren’t about republicans, then this thread isn’t about them at all. It just so happens that some of the crazies that support the republicans were at the tea parties. The question is, have republicans gone over the deep end.

Take some exchanges on this thread as an example. I didn’t see one “conservative” talk down any of the conspiracy theorists. No one from “the hard right” argued AGAINST the conspiracies. We had one guy come on and say Obama MAY be a Muslim and others discuss how he’s no longer a US citizen because of “what he did” when he was six (or what “his dad” did). You’d expect this sort of insanity from the far right or left…but you’d also expect moderates to step in and “kindly” put those silly arguments down…this hasn’t been happening lately, which is why I’m wondering if Republicans are crazy.

Personally I’d like a strong Republican Party. I feel conservative ideals have merit and should be discussed. But when “the crazies” take over…

102

I believe conservative values are very important, down to a penny saved is a penny earned, not vend all services out to for profit companies that I may own stock in.
I believe the Democrats are probably more conservative than the Republicans , it is just the Republicans have redefined conservative values as being (1), not taxing the top 1% , (2)Anti abortion,(3) anti gay, (4)anti poor,(5) anti education,(6) anti middle class, they may be more negative than positive.
If they stood for something positive rather than all this dogma I might be a Republican. I think the Democrats have advantages because they stand for something positive they do not build on hate of everything that is not pure Christian.

103

[i]Republican Pit Bull Attacks Don?t Hurt Obama: Albert R. Hunt

Commentary by Albert R. Hunt

April 20 (Bloomberg) – William Faulkner famously wrote that every Southern boy?s dreams peaked at ?not yet 2 o?clock? on July 3, 1863, at Gettysburg, moments before Pickett?s Charge doomed the Confederacy in the American Civil War.

For some elements of the anti-Barack Obama right wing, a comparable moment might be on April 12 when it was barely noon in Washington, moments before U.S. Navy SEALs killed three Somali pirates and rescued kidnapped American sea captain Richard Phillips.

In the days and hours before, these critics painted the Somali pirate stalemate as a metaphor for the weakness of the Obama administration?s national security policy. That Sunday morning, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich blamed the pirate attacks on a lack of ?will? by the White House, which seeks a ?magical solution? that ?doesn?t involve risk and doesn?t involve making hard decisions.?

One right-wing blogger wrote that the Somali pirates have been emboldened by the administration?s ?touchy feely? military posture.

A few hours later, making a hard decision sanctioned by the president, the SEALs blasted the three pirates on the small lifeboat, and Captain Phillips was freed.

Politics, Not Policy

This wasn?t a major crisis, not the often-discussed 3 a.m. national security moment for Obama; it was more about politics than policy.

Still, it illustrates the vacuity of the Republican and conservative commentary. Prior to that noon, they were suggesting that after 100 pirate incidents in those waters and more than 270 hostages, some Somali Sinbad realized that Obama had cut back on missile defense, showing the U.S.?s weakness, and so decided to attack.

There is a case to be made against this administration?s foreign and domestic policies. It just isn?t being made by the chief opposition. The Republican governor of Texas won?t dismiss calls for secession, an issue that was settled on those Gettysburg fields.

This, as much as Obama?s persuasive communication skills, political acumen, strong advisers and appealing positions, may explain why the president remains so popular and Republicans so unpopular.

It often takes a party some time after losing an election to regain its political sea legs. Some smart Republican politicians profess not to be worried now, as long as they can provide more coherent resistance by this summer.

Hangover From Bush

Perhaps. But this is a party still reeling from George W. Bush?s perceived failures, a shortage of compelling national figures, and ambiguity over whether the greater need is to energize its intense but shrinking base or woo an increasingly skeptical middle.

When Pentagon chief Robert Gates unveiled a sweeping overhaul of defense policy, legitimate doubts were expressed. Yet much of the Republican message – 2008 standard-bearer John McCain being an exception – was capsulized in Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe?s warning that the Obama administration was ?disarming? America.

Never mind Obama. Do they really believe that Gates, the first President Bush?s Central Intelligence Agency director and the second President Bush?s defense secretary, would ?disarm? America?

On economic issues, the Grand Old Party almost unanimously opposed Obama?s economic-stimulus package. When pressed for their own solutions, the best congressional Republicans could come up with was cutting taxes, especially for wealthier Americans.

Attacked From Left

On the bank-rescue plan, the most serious complaints have come from the left: Nobel Prize-winning economists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman.

It?s instructive to look at those who were expected to be the Republican superstars when Obama took office. Politically and intellectually, the two most astute critics were to be Gingrich and Karl Rove, Bush?s former top political adviser. Instead, both have looked more like opportunistic attack dogs.

When not defending the world against the threat of piracy, Gingrich is a self-appointed morals cop: The Obama administration is ?anti-religious,? the University of Notre Dame had no right to invite the president to give a commencement address because his policies are ?anti- Catholic.? The thrice-married Gingrich, who converted to Catholicism last month, apparently feels he knows Notre Dame and Catholic values better than does Father Theodore Hesburgh, the university?s president emeritus.

Preferring Iran?

Rove joined Gingrich in expressing shock that, in a speech in Ankara to the Muslim world, Obama seemed to empathize with Turkey?s secular politics. Do they prefer Iran?s brand of Islam?

Rove has also decried what he says is the partisanship of the Obama presidency. This from a man who, after eight years in Washington, has no identifiable friends or allies among Democratic politicians.

The hot new faces of a more-inclusive Republican Party were going to be recently elected party Chairman Michael Steele, an African-American, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, an Indian-American, and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, a Jewish-American.

Steele has made so many faux pas that there?s a movement, probably futile, to remove him. Jindal flamed out after his response to Obama?s address to a joint session of Congress, when he seemed to suggest the response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 underscored the Republican message of limited government.

?Just Say No?

Cantor, like Jindal a smart man, became the public identity of Republican ?just say no? negativism; he rails against government intrusion even as he votes for a confiscatory tax on executive bonuses. He publicly grovels to win right-wing talkmeister Rush Limbaugh?s approval, and while positioning himself as the party?s chief Obama critic, goes to a Britney Spears concert on the night of a presidential news conference.

As the new administration reaches its 100-day mark, the opposition really has only one strategy: Count on Obama to fail.

This was depicted recently on ?Saturday Night Live,? a TV program whose satire often captures the American political zeitgeist. The show featured a meeting of congressional Republican leaders, desperately looking for an issue on which to attack Obama. They settle on going after White House sleepovers for the Obamas? young girls.

Life often mirrors fiction. So there was the ubiquitous Gingrich last weekend expressing disdain over the first family?s new puppy, Bo: ?Who cares?? he sniffed. Bo versus Newt. Put it to the American public.

(Albert R. Hunt is the executive editor for Washington at Bloomberg News. The opinions expressed are his own.) [/i]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aAjl4cILWMHI&refer=politics

104

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

I doubt it. Or, if they would have happened, they would have been much smaller. Fox currently sponsors these events which is going to bring out people. [/quote]

Idiotic to think Fox sponsors these…gimme a break. This came out of a financial rant off CNBC… ANOTHER NETWORK.

Fox simply covered the story. In their coverage I guess you could argue it’s sponsorship huh?

105

[i]The movement ? if that?s what it is ? was spawned by a rant on Feb. 19 from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange during a live report by the CNBC reporter ? if that?s what he is ? Rick Santelli, suggesting that it was time to organize a ?tea party? to protest government spending on failed mortgages.

The cable news networks took it from there. Fox News, after running more than 100 promos about its coverage of the event, which did a pretty effective job of marketing them at the same time, had wall-to-wall coverage on the anointed day and dispatched four of its leading hosts around the country to perform a kind of hybrid task, covering events that they also seemed to be leading.[/i]

100 promos, wall-to-wall coverage, and four leading hosts? What word would you like to use?

106

I can say for sure that our local one was grass roots. Whatever Fox (or whoever) may be doing, those are still regular folks showing up.

107

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

100 promos, wall-to-wall coverage, and four leading hosts? What word would you like to use?
[/quote]

NEWS Coverage…in a world where the media would rather ignore and make sexual jokes about the groups of AMERICANS who pay taxes and don’t agree with socialism and the path we are on today.

Don’t dispair…Obama went to Venezuala, and traded books about socialism. David Ayers was there in 2006, and received an award for his efforts against evil capitalism.

Your agenda is on track, and we see it.

108

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I can say for sure that our local one was grass roots. Whatever Fox (or whoever) may be doing, those are still regular folks showing up. [/quote]

Agreed. There are towns that are not on the map who created their own party. This scares the crap out of the newly annointed tyrants, so they turn to their media outlet to let it be known they will fully disparage the CITIZENS of this country who are tired of the Bullshit inside job being executed on the majority.

109

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there. [/quote]

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.

110

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

100 promos, wall-to-wall coverage, and four leading hosts? What word would you like to use?

NEWS Coverage…in a world where the media would rather ignore and make sexual jokes about the groups of AMERICANS who pay taxes and don’t agree with socialism and the path we are on today.

Don’t dispair…Obama went to Venezuala, and traded books about socialism. David Ayers was there in 2006, and received an award for his efforts against evil capitalism.

Your agenda is on track, and we see it.

[/quote]

Sexual Jokes?!? those have no place around these parts http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/obama_and_chavez

Good luck with the whole “socialist” thing by the way. It fits nicely given the thread title.

111

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there.

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.
[/quote]

So… you don’t think that CNN stuff was “pure Propaganda”? Have you thought this one through?

112

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there.

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.

So… you don’t think that CNN stuff was “pure Propaganda”? Have you thought this one through?[/quote]

Glad you are candadian.

113

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there.

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.

So… you don’t think that CNN stuff was “pure Propaganda”? Have you thought this one through?

Glad you are candadian.

[/quote]

ummmm… I’ll bite. Was this an insult?

114

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there.

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.

So… you don’t think that CNN stuff was “pure Propaganda”? Have you thought this one through?[/quote]

It wouldn’t be if the Tea Parties were giant orgies demarked by lay balls across others faces. But they weren’t. It was a clear attempt by CNN to mock the people and the parties, not report or investigate what they are and why people are doing it. What they said would have been fine on the late night TV circuit, but these idiots are not comedians.
Rush gets lambasted because he said he wants obama’s socialist style wish list for America to fail, but these cock suckers make crude sexual jokes about people protesting and nary a whisper…No, there is no double standard here.

Wonder what would happen if they made sexual jokes about the next gay march?

115

[quote]pat wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:

The cable news networks took it from there.

Really?..Pure Propaganda. “The cable news networks” …include who, FOX and ONLY FOX? A single network. Otherwise it was covering “Dispicaple”, “Unameircan”,“Teabagging” with laughs all over the CABLE “news” networks.

CNN’s Anderson had the best line…“Its hard to talk when you’re teabagging”…he certainly would know.

So… you don’t think that CNN stuff was “pure Propaganda”? Have you thought this one through?

It wouldn’t be if the Tea Parties were giant orgies demarked by lay balls across others faces. But they weren’t. It was a clear attempt by CNN to mock the people and the parties, not report or investigate what they are and why people are doing it. What they said would have been fine on the late night TV circuit, but these idiots are not comedians.
Rush gets lambasted because he said he wants obama’s socialist style wish list for America to fail, but these cock suckers make crude sexual jokes about people protesting and nary a whisper…No, there is no double standard here.

Wonder what would happen if they made sexual jokes about the next gay march?[/quote]

While I agree with you about double standards , I would have to say the Republicans started it :slight_smile:

116

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090524/pl_bloomberg/aqx3heb2memg

117

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Very few factual points. Mostly unsubstantiated name-calling.

I would like to adress one of the few “facts” of the article:

"But that?s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the ?spontaneous? riot back in 2000 ? actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists ? that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida?s Miami-Dade County.?

It is true but very misleading. The GOP in the 2000 election opposed a selective by county recount. So yes they opposed recounting solely Miami-Dade county. It was, however, pushing for a state-wide recount, which as you can guess was opposed by the Dems.

Agreed that it’s lacking facual information. Huge generalization and far fetched comparison of crazy to the “secret Muslim” ideal.

Is it crazy for one to think Obama is Muslim based on:

  1. He was raised in a Muslim environment mostly outside the US and has a Muslim family background.
  2. Said he prides himself on his “Muslim Faith”
    Obama: "My Muslim Faith" - YouTube
  3. There are pictures of him wearing a turbin.
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xnqPx6S9S-g/R8TVOBU4b-I/AAAAAAAAAIo/ibTCqs3bBnc/s400/Obama-turbantearekin-2008022617031904xm1.jpg
  4. He bows to the Saudi King

Am I crazy to believe he is Muslim???

Frankly, I think you are crazy to believe otherwise.
[/quote]

If that makes you think Obama is a muslim then you must be very stupid
Are you able to think or what?

An cutted-off video of Obama telling about ‘his muslim faith’ the republicans with all their usual demagogism have gave him to scare the masses don’t make him a muslism.

Wearing an turban at some kind of cultural meeting doesnt make you a muslim.

118

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Jab1 wrote:
Anyone who doesn’t want national health care is pretty crazy I reckon.

And people actually think Obama is a muslim? You know there is a reason why the world image of the States is a lumbering idiot. It’s a shame, because there are a hell of a lot of smart people in the country.

Worry about England and your great health care system. Average wait for a gall bladder operation in England, 9 months.

I had mine done in less than two weeks and it could have been sooner if I didn’t have to adjust my office schedule. How is that waiting in the parking lot in an ambulance for hours because the mandated no one waits over 4 hours law?

You are truly a fool.

[/quote]

I’d rather wait 9 months in the worst case for a surgery than not being able to get one because I have to pay 500K$

Wake up

119

[quote]malonetd wrote:
Jab1 wrote:
Anyone who doesn’t want national health care is pretty crazy I reckon.

Anyone who DOES want national health care is batshit insane I reckon.

Why would I chose a service provider – wait, scratch that. Why would I want to be forced to have a provider chosen for me? Does the government know my body better than me? What the fuck do a bunch of lifetime politicians know about health and medicine?[/quote]

What do you know about medecine anyway? Anyway it is not about medecine it is about organisation. If you are about to die, unable to pay to get treatment I am sure you would
be happy to have a national health care. But you got some money, and the poor people they can go fuck themselves, eh?

120

[quote]force of one wrote:
I don’t think Obama is a Muslim, but he is a radical leftist.
I don’t think Republicans are crazy, just leaderless and lacking in group identity.

But don’t worry. Assuming this country survives Barry’s administation, the post Obama backlash will be HUGE. Bigger than anything we have ever seen before. Bigger even than the horrible soul sucking megatrend liberalism has turned into.

I don’t think free healthcare for all is a bad idea in and of itself, but there’s just no way you can transorm THIS countries healthcare system to a socialistic model with out completely wrecking it. people say 'it will be like Canada" and “It will be like t3h UK”… Nope. It would be a lot worse.

It’s very popular in society these days to put down and demonize Republicans because Bush was a Republican. But personally I tend to resist the tug of popular sentiment and look at things objectively.[/quote]

How do you know the backlash will be HUGE?
radical leftist? I don’t think so. It is been a long time that any kind of leftist has but cutted out from the political dialogue in USA. Heck, in the 30’s people used to witch hunt communist and hang them.

For the crazyness…most of you thinks the world was created in 6days and that climate changes don’t exist. Even if you are proven scientifically wrong you will continue to deny. This is an ideology and it is far from rationnal