Republican Party Hypocrisies

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]Rockscar wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…the insane leftist America hating Dems that are in power now. [/quote]

Turn down the rhetoric, spawn of Beck[/quote]
Actually my views predate Beck by like a couple decades. If you knew me 20 years ago I was saying essentially the same thing then too only about different politicians (some of em are still around). I also said the same thing right here in this forum as soon as Obama looked like a serious candidate and before I ever heard of Glenn Beck. There are witnesses.

I stand by my statement. The power structure in place at this moment are enemies of the United States as founded and are accomplishing what our cold war enemies couldn’t without firing a shot. I am not, BTW, saying it started with election of Barack Obama by a long shot, but he is the first actually ill intentioned president in my lifetime. He hates this nation and is doing everything he can come hell or high water to redesign it in the image of his socialist utopian heroes.[/quote]

When we have strong views and points, they are all too quick to call Rush, Beck, Hannity etc.
[/quote]
These clowns are woefully unfamiliar with something like independent thought so it doesn’t occur to them that somebody else may be engaging in it.

I didn’t even watch Beck for the first several months he was on. I was busy at that time of the day and I didn’t know anything about him. Some guys here actually got me watching him. I found that his message was in many areas what I had been saying for years and I was just happy it was getting a voice. Apparently I’m not alone as his show is a smashing success.

22

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
I think Republicans in this country have lost their non-interventionist roots. Republicans should be focused on small, limited influence government. However, it seems like they aren’t what they seem.

The Republican Party Hypocrisies:

  1. Supports large military force supported by our tax dollars
    -This should not be necessary if they follow their non-interventionist foreign policy

[/quote]
So dems are hypocritically anti-military, when they should be pro-military?

So dems are hypocritically Pro gay marriage and pro abortion?

So dems are hypocritically anti-Nasa?

So dems are hypocritically pro-drug?

I think the bigger argument here is that bush got bashed on his responce to katrina, and obama wasn’t held to the same standard.

However, you are entirely misrepresenting the average conservative viewpoint. The typical conservative does not believe the government should do nothing. the general belief is that it should stick to doing the basic tenants of governing. Military, roads, protection of the individual, ect. When it comes to these issues, it makes since to have government intervention and it isn’t contradictory to ideals.

But yes, in general the republican party is out of touch with their base. hence, libertarians and the tea party.
[/quote]

As a Libertarian I can’t argue with your last two paragraphs, but what is it that makes you automatically assume that if one thing is true for conservatives, the opposite must also be true for liberals? It’s that sort of thinking that ends up degenerating every goddamned topic in this forum into a he said, she said, they started it first, bunch of bullshit. Just because conservatives believe one thing doesn’t necessarily mean that liberals hold the polar opposite view.

23

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
I think Republicans in this country have lost their non-interventionist roots. Republicans should be focused on small, limited influence government. However, it seems like they aren’t what they seem.

The Republican Party Hypocrisies:

  1. Supports large military force supported by our tax dollars
    -This should not be necessary if they follow their non-interventionist foreign policy

[/quote]
So dems are hypocritically anti-military, when they should be pro-military?

So dems are hypocritically Pro gay marriage and pro abortion?

So dems are hypocritically anti-Nasa?

So dems are hypocritically pro-drug?

I think the bigger argument here is that bush got bashed on his responce to katrina, and obama wasn’t held to the same standard.

However, you are entirely misrepresenting the average conservative viewpoint. The typical conservative does not believe the government should do nothing. the general belief is that it should stick to doing the basic tenants of governing. Military, roads, protection of the individual, ect. When it comes to these issues, it makes since to have government intervention and it isn’t contradictory to ideals.

But yes, in general the republican party is out of touch with their base. hence, libertarians and the tea party.
[/quote]

As a Libertarian I can’t argue with your last two paragraphs, but what is it that makes you automatically assume that if one thing is true for conservatives, the opposite must also be true for liberals? It’s that sort of thinking that ends up degenerating every goddamned topic in this forum into a he said, she said, they started it first, bunch of bullshit. Just because conservatives believe one thing doesn’t necessarily mean that liberals hold the polar opposite view.[/quote]

Care to provide an example?

24

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
I think Republicans in this country have lost their non-interventionist roots. Republicans should be focused on small, limited influence government. However, it seems like they aren’t what they seem.

The Republican Party Hypocrisies:

  1. Supports large military force supported by our tax dollars
    -This should not be necessary if they follow their non-interventionist foreign policy

[/quote]
So dems are hypocritically anti-military, when they should be pro-military?

So dems are hypocritically Pro gay marriage and pro abortion?

So dems are hypocritically anti-Nasa?

So dems are hypocritically pro-drug?

I think the bigger argument here is that bush got bashed on his responce to katrina, and obama wasn’t held to the same standard.

However, you are entirely misrepresenting the average conservative viewpoint. The typical conservative does not believe the government should do nothing. the general belief is that it should stick to doing the basic tenants of governing. Military, roads, protection of the individual, ect. When it comes to these issues, it makes since to have government intervention and it isn’t contradictory to ideals.

But yes, in general the republican party is out of touch with their base. hence, libertarians and the tea party.
[/quote]

As a Libertarian I can’t argue with your last two paragraphs, but what is it that makes you automatically assume that if one thing is true for conservatives, the opposite must also be true for liberals? It’s that sort of thinking that ends up degenerating every goddamned topic in this forum into a he said, she said, they started it first, bunch of bullshit. Just because conservatives believe one thing doesn’t necessarily mean that liberals hold the polar opposite view.[/quote]

I didn’t really mean that to be taken as literal. I was mostly pointing out flaws in the OPs argument. “republicans want government to do nothing” is the logical equivalent of “dems want the government to do everything”. It is wrong to categorize either viewpoint with such a narrow and false statement.

25

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Rockscar wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…the insane leftist America hating Dems that are in power now. [/quote]

Turn down the rhetoric, spawn of Beck[/quote]
Actually my views predate Beck by like a couple decades. If you knew me 20 years ago I was saying essentially the same thing then too only about different politicians (some of em are still around). I also said the same thing right here in this forum as soon as Obama looked like a serious candidate and before I ever heard of Glenn Beck. There are witnesses.

I stand by my statement. The power structure in place at this moment are enemies of the United States as founded and are accomplishing what our cold war enemies couldn’t without firing a shot. I am not, BTW, saying it started with election of Barack Obama by a long shot, but he is the first actually ill intentioned president in my lifetime. He hates this nation and is doing everything he can come hell or high water to redesign it in the image of his socialist utopian heroes.[/quote]

When we have strong views and points, they are all too quick to call Rush, Beck, Hannity etc.
[/quote]

it’s because they are “labelers” - the surest sign of a weak mind - label it and then (even if the label does not apply) dismiss the label and thus the argument . . . .[/quote]

Ah yes, support your rhetoric with more! My “weak” mind obviously doesn’t have a chance against your “strong” argument, I guess I’m just a “labeler” that can only “other” your argument.

The Beck comment was less to do with his views, and more to do with his strategy (oddly similar to those above…) of mocking and dismissing anybody with opposing views, rather that engaging in a civilized debate (we call this “politics”). Just because we disagree, doesn’t mean we can’t show each other respect…

26

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
<<< Ah yes, support your rhetoric with more! My “weak” mind obviously doesn’t have a chance against your “strong” argument, I guess I’m just a “labeler” that can only “other” your argument.

The Beck comment was less to do with his views, and more to do with his strategy (oddly similar to those above…) of mocking and dismissing anybody with opposing views, rather that engaging in a civilized debate (we call this “politics”). Just because we disagree, doesn’t mean we can’t show each other respect…
[/quote]
OK, you lost all credibility with this post here if you ever had any. Clearly you have never seen Beck or anybody’s posts on this forum. Or you are suffering from some sort of data retention issue. You certainly don’t agree and that’s your right, but all 3 people who responded to your Beck comment have long histories of long posts filled with substance and are among the more civil participants in these forums.

Additionally. Glenn Beck provides more unassailable documentation for his views than anybody in the world. He also provides some that has me scowling at my TV here and there and I say so right here. However I require much less from someone I’d consider a political ally than I do from spiritual allies(another story), so politically I see him as a friend.

It would behoove you to learn to assess someone beyond their point m shoot posts which just about everybody has sometimes.

27

I think anyone who has been half-awake since Reagan can see that the Republican Party (at the national level at least) are total hypocrites. Just look at the national debt. You’d think it would go up under Dems and down under Republicans, but it just keeps going up and up.

They are both big-government parties, the only differences between them are their stands on social issues: not their willingness to use government to enforce social policy.

28

[quote]Spartiates wrote:
I think anyone who has been half-awake since Reagan can see that the Republican Party (at the national level at least) are total hypocrites. Just look at the national debt. You’d think it would go up under Dems and down under Republicans, but it just keeps going up and up.

They are both big-government parties, the only differences between them are their stands on social issues: not their willingness to use government to enforce social policy.[/quote]

Excellent points.

Over the past two years or so, I’ve seen less of a tendency on this Forum to paint one of the parties as “Big Government” (DEMS) and the other are “Small Government” (GOP). The GOP may “talk the game” more…but history has proven them to be spenders as big as the DEMS.

Some have gone down “kicking and screaming” (posting all kinds of useless graphs and tables to paint the GOP as “small goverment”)…but it hasn’t washed.

It also seems that the Tea Party is not buying the rhetoric either.

Mufasa

29

This exact thing has been addressed more times than I count already too.

30

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
I think Republicans in this country have lost their non-interventionist roots. Republicans should be focused on small, limited influence government. However, it seems like they aren’t what they seem.

The Republican Party Hypocrisies:

  1. Supports large military force supported by our tax dollars
    -This should not be necessary if they follow their non-interventionist foreign policy

  2. Against Gay Marriage and Abortion
    -I thought the Republican party was about limited government influence in our lives. How much more personal can you get than these two issues.

  3. Strong Supporters of NASA
    -This is a big government run program. Shouldn’t it be Democrats who are pushing this one more?

  4. Drug Policy
    -Shouldn’t Republicans be against the drug war since this is more intervention in our lives?

  5. Gulf Spill
    -Republicans argued Obama did nothing in response to the spill. But if they are true believers in small, non-interventionist government, they shouldn’t have proposed the government do a thing and let the companies take care of the issue.
    [/quote]

Hypocrisy? You act as if Republicans have abandonded what, to you, are supposedly historical Republican positions. Since when has the GoP been the Libertarian party?

31

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Irishsteel forgot about the anti healthcare plank.

I do agree thought that both parties are horrible. We have the squishy confused liberal GOP and the insane leftist America hating Dems that are in power now. There are still some Democrats who think their party is almost as bad as I do not to paint them all with the same ultra hard left Alinsky worshiping brush.[/quote]

America hating?

32

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
I think Republicans in this country have lost their non-interventionist roots. Republicans should be focused on small, limited influence government. However, it seems like they aren’t what they seem.

The Republican Party Hypocrisies:

  1. Supports large military force supported by our tax dollars
    -This should not be necessary if they follow their non-interventionist foreign policy

  2. Against Gay Marriage and Abortion
    -I thought the Republican party was about limited government influence in our lives. How much more personal can you get than these two issues.

  3. Strong Supporters of NASA
    -This is a big government run program. Shouldn’t it be Democrats who are pushing this one more?

  4. Drug Policy
    -Shouldn’t Republicans be against the drug war since this is more intervention in our lives?

  5. Gulf Spill
    -Republicans argued Obama did nothing in response to the spill. But if they are true believers in small, non-interventionist government, they shouldn’t have proposed the government do a thing and let the companies take care of the issue.
    [/quote]

Hypocrisy? You act as if Republicans have abandonded what, to you, are supposedly historical Republican positions. Since when has the GoP been the Libertarian party? [/quote]

What do they stand for? Controlling people they do not agree with, Making policies that hurt the poor and then act as doing so is Righteous, claiming if some one does not agree with their policies that they are not intelligent or educated or are acting in their own self interest.

33

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Irishsteel forgot about the anti healthcare plank.

I do agree thought that both parties are horrible. We have the squishy confused liberal GOP and the insane leftist America hating Dems that are in power now. There are still some Democrats who think their party is almost as bad as I do not to paint them all with the same ultra hard left Alinsky worshiping brush.[/quote]

America hating?[/quote]
Unhesitatingly yes.

34

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
<<< Ah yes, support your rhetoric with more! My “weak” mind obviously doesn’t have a chance against your “strong” argument, I guess I’m just a “labeler” that can only “other” your argument.

The Beck comment was less to do with his views, and more to do with his strategy (oddly similar to those above…) of mocking and dismissing anybody with opposing views, rather that engaging in a civilized debate (we call this “politics”). Just because we disagree, doesn’t mean we can’t show each other respect…
[/quote]

OK, you lost all credibility with this post here if you ever had any. Clearly you have never seen Beck or anybody’s posts on this forum. Or you are suffering from some sort of data retention issue. You certainly don’t agree and that’s your right, but all 3 people who responded to your Beck comment have long histories of long posts filled with substance and are among the more civil participants in these forums.

Additionally. Glenn Beck provides more unassailable documentation for his views than anybody in the world. He also provides some that has me scowling at my TV here and there and I say so right here. However I require much less from someone I’d consider a political ally than I do from spiritual allies(another story), so politically I see him as a friend.

It would behoove you to learn to assess someone beyond their point m shoot posts which just about everybody has sometimes.[/quote]

I understand it is unfair to latch on to small posts, or segments of posts, and take things out of context. But I still think the rhetoric you are using is far too extreme.

Mocked.

Dismissed.

Just because we disagree doesn’t mean we can’t show each other respect.

35

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote: <<<Just because we disagree doesn’t mean we can’t show each other respect. >>>[/quote]I’m ready. You began this exchange by calling me “spawn of Beck” which anybody who knows me here knows is not the case. Then you accused me of substance-less attacks which is also manifestly untrue.
For your finale you call me out for not showing respect when all I did was point out that your own false words have destroyed your credibility, at least on this front.

In case you haven’t noticed I have not PM’d you asking your opinion on my “rhetoric”. If you don’t like it I invite to demonstrate why. That would include actual refutation, which if forthcoming I would publicly admit my error.

37

Tribulus, I apologize, you are a quality poster and my Beck comment was inappropriate.

Push, dance in traffic.

38

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Tribulus, I apologize, you are a quality poster and my Beck comment was inappropriate.

Push, dance in traffic.
[/quote]
No need for all this contrition dude, but I do appreciate that.

39

lolz at op being “pro science” as compared to…what, the anti science republican party? if they are anti science, where is the GOP going to get the technology for bigger bombs?

Blowin shit up takes science.

Ah politics.

40

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
lolz at op being “pro science” as compared to…what, the anti science republican party? if they are anti science, where is the GOP going to get the technology for bigger bombs?

Blowin shit up takes science.

Ah politics. [/quote]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1001.blake.html

There are other examples. Like wanting theology taught in Science class.