*nods. Yeah. I don't get the current Republicans at all. I don't know if it's cause I'm Canadian and I totally can see the benefit of a system of healthcare that isn't run by the insurance companies... And the stuff he talks about being small stuff.. It's big stuff! Money away from PBS (big bird) is money away from educational media, something sorely lacking when you look at the American media. The War on Women/binders? That's not small stuff. Women's body's shouldn't be legislated. That's about equality! I know it's s slippery slope argument, but once you start legislating the body, how much further is it before women should be baby factories, not working, not voting, whatever? It dehumanizes the person to take choice away from them. Let's not even add in the whole women in the workplace/binders of women bs (something Romney had no right to claim, he didn't put any effort into that, it was presented to him by outside parties).
"The old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community." This is not what the Republicans said. The message the Republicans put out there was that they were not for equality - race, sexual orientation, gender. Obama was the one talking about charity and helping out in the community.
I sincerely hope that the Republican party and it's supporters can get their heads out of their asses. The first Republican president was Lincoln. Has any of that party even understood the first sentence of his Gettysberg address, one of the most quoted sentences in American history? The man was about equality! When you look over what each Republican president is known for.. quite a few were very focused on civil rights. You read their histories, so many of those early presidents wouldn't recognize their party anymore, their ideals are with current Democratic parties.
Anyways, yeah. I am flabbergasted at the Republicans now.
The definitions change over the years as the smaller factions attempt to take prominence. Bush wasn't fiscally conservative and neither is Romney but that's who they're trying to court so that's the label they apply to themselves.
They toss around phrases like redistribution of wealth in scary tones while ignoring that supply-side economics does exactly that when they refuse to close the loopholes that benefits companies from shipping jobs overseas.
Of course if they were actual conservatives they'd come up with a plan to close the $300B/yr tax gap from people who simply don't pay what they owe. Then they wouldn't need to raise taxes.
But yeah, the guy who advocates feeding and taking care of people is the antichrist.
For serious. I lean libertarian (in the "social liberalism but fiscal restraint" way, not the "we'd make Ayn Rand required reading in all school curricula if the very existence of school curricula weren't an intolerable infringement of personal liberty" way), and side-eye the American left's tendency to slap band-aids on giant hemorrhaging wounds and then descend into magical thinking and demagoguery with whoever's not happy about it. But man, at least they're trying, and they're more-or-less what it says on the tin. I'll take "overtax and overspend, partly on social programs ranging from vital to benignly ineffectual, partly on boondoggles for assorted rent-seeking interest groups" over "undertax, overspend on the military-industrial complex and boondoggles for assorted really scary rent-seeking interest groups, justify it by pinching pennies from school-lunch programs, try to ram Christian fundamentalism into everyone's private lives, and cap it all off by claiming to be the party of small government." Aside from being a far more unpleasant form of fiscal irresponsibility, that's just insulting.
Ditto regulation. Does anyone really approve of the half-assed thickets of red tape that emerged from the Democrats' attempts to reform health care and financial markets? I doubt it, but I sure as shit am not going to vote them out when the Republicans are waiting in the wings to craft efficient legislation that will neatly rig the game in favor of financiers and oligopolists.
Unusually enough for Rush Limbaugh, that article would almost be a seductive line of reasoning if the only major alternative to the Democrats actually represented "hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance" and all the rest. But the Republicans have jumped off Batshit Cliff and are too busy rolling around in the guano cushion at the bottom, trading vitriol about everyone up above who hasn't taken the plunge, to represent much of anything. Rush accusing Obama voters of believing in Santa Claus is, well, a bit rich.
Doesn't matter, Kita; it's perfect! One of the topics guaranteed to drive me up the great wall of rants is the irony of the Small Government Party's obsession with people's sexual behavior. (makes bilabial fricative sound.)
Yeah. I don't get the current Republicans at all. I don't know if it's cause I'm Canadian and I totally can see the benefit of a system of healthcare that isn't run by the insurance companies... And the stuff he talks about being small stuff.. It's big stuff! Don't look at me. I'm a Scandinavian living in England, I'm pretty much a Communist by their standards.
"The old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community." This is not what the Republicans said. The message the Republicans put out there was that they were not for equality - race, sexual orientation, gender. Obama was the one talking about charity and helping out in the community. I think they've perfected doublethink?
You read their histories, so many of those early presidents wouldn't recognize their party anymore, their ideals are with current Democratic parties. *nods* It's very strange. Let's hope the party manages to claw things back from the Tea Party wingnuts.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Even that rant of his is out of touch with reality....
no subject
no subject
"The old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community." This is not what the Republicans said. The message the Republicans put out there was that they were not for equality - race, sexual orientation, gender. Obama was the one talking about charity and helping out in the community.
I sincerely hope that the Republican party and it's supporters can get their heads out of their asses. The first Republican president was Lincoln. Has any of that party even understood the first sentence of his Gettysberg address, one of the most quoted sentences in American history? The man was about equality! When you look over what each Republican president is known for.. quite a few were very focused on civil rights. You read their histories, so many of those early presidents wouldn't recognize their party anymore, their ideals are with current Democratic parties.
Anyways, yeah. I am flabbergasted at the Republicans now.
no subject
The definitions change over the years as the smaller factions attempt to take prominence. Bush wasn't fiscally conservative and neither is Romney but that's who they're trying to court so that's the label they apply to themselves.
They toss around phrases like redistribution of wealth in scary tones while ignoring that supply-side economics does exactly that when they refuse to close the loopholes that benefits companies from shipping jobs overseas.
Of course if they were actual conservatives they'd come up with a plan to close the $300B/yr tax gap from people who simply don't pay what they owe. Then they wouldn't need to raise taxes.
But yeah, the guy who advocates feeding and taking care of people is the antichrist.
no subject
Ditto regulation. Does anyone really approve of the half-assed thickets of red tape that emerged from the Democrats' attempts to reform health care and financial markets? I doubt it, but I sure as shit am not going to vote them out when the Republicans are waiting in the wings to craft efficient legislation that will neatly rig the game in favor of financiers and oligopolists.
Unusually enough for Rush Limbaugh, that article would almost be a seductive line of reasoning if the only major alternative to the Democrats actually represented "hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance" and all the rest. But the Republicans have jumped off Batshit Cliff and are too busy rolling around in the guano cushion at the bottom, trading vitriol about everyone up above who hasn't taken the plunge, to represent much of anything. Rush accusing Obama voters of believing in Santa Claus is, well, a bit rich.
no subject
no subject
Seriously. That is a great, great, line!
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Don't look at me. I'm a Scandinavian living in England, I'm pretty much a Communist by their standards.
"The old capitalism, the old arguments of hard work, stick-to-itiveness, self-reliance, charity, helping out in the community." This is not what the Republicans said. The message the Republicans put out there was that they were not for equality - race, sexual orientation, gender. Obama was the one talking about charity and helping out in the community.
I think they've perfected doublethink?
You read their histories, so many of those early presidents wouldn't recognize their party anymore, their ideals are with current Democratic parties.
*nods* It's very strange. Let's hope the party manages to claw things back from the Tea Party wingnuts.
no subject
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151299959267177&set=a.10150134893762177.329350.609677176&type=1&theater
Hope it works for you.
no subject
Will get back to your other comment later...
no subject