Are Republicans still a National Party?

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Haus

The conservatives actually picked up numbers. Which I cannot explain.

Because most people equate "Conservative" to mean "Lower Taxes" and "Liberal" to mean "Higher Taxes". Who the hell wants "Higher Taxes"? No one. The fact that "Conservatives" forget to mention however is that the goal of "Lower Taxes" is unattainable. However, year after year after year that is the platform they run on. No Republican/Conservative/Fox New Business Commentator can go 1-2 sentences without stating "Lower Taxes". Drink every time Rush Limbaugh says "Lower Taxes" in one broadcast and you will drunk by the 2nd half hour. Running on a platform of "Lower Taxes" is like running on a platform of "World Peace". What is the your opponent going to say? I want "Higher taxes"? I do not want "World Peace". If you examine the Republican platform is is full of platitudes and common sense goals that are not unique to their party but it works on people who tend to vote Republican. Who can argue against the bible, guns, "Lower taxes", supporting the military, and personal responsibility? Republicans actually believe those are unique to the Republican Party. The majority of the people see through that bullshit however. At least they did in 2008 and 1992. They saw through it in 2000 also but that election was stolen.

Bush won on "Lower Taxes" but did not deliver. Bush is still fresh in people's memory so no Republican will win until they forget about Bush. Once the people forget that Republicans can not actually lower taxes a new Republican will run and win on "Lower Taxes". He will say "Read my lips" and fail to lower taxes and then a Democrat will be in the pick up the pieces.

Even in 2008 Obama had to run on "Lower taxes" to win. In 2012 he will again run on "Lower taxes". Every politician from Mayors to Governors to the President runs on "Lower Taxes". The one who wins is the one who says "Lower Taxes" the most. Obama said it more than John McCain so he won. Obama will have to go all out to say "Lower Taxes" more than Romney, Palin, or whatever moron the Republicans pick to run against him in 2012. The only phase that may be said by a Republican more than "Lower Taxes" is "Ronald Reagan".

It is an endless cycle.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

The Party of Family Values.

[Haus]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

The Party of Family Values.

Yeah... (Out of Washington, Edwards Finds Worries Remain) damn them...

[Knucklehead]

Originally Posted by Haus

Yeah... (Out of Washington, Edwards Finds Worries Remain) damn them...

You do understand the concept of hypocrisy, I hope? One party claims their party platform is rooted solidly in family values, whereas the other party never goes around chanting that mantra.

You see, hypocrisy is born from this juxtaposition of what you say versus what you do. For example: Barney Frank comes out and says he's been living a secret life with a woman he had secreted away in the Catskills, admits he's the father of seven love children, and with head hung shamefully confesses to America at a press conference that he is, indeed, straight. Well, that would be hypocrisy.

The Republicans, however, have built themselves up to be hypocrites every time they fail to live up to the standards of the ubermensch they expect every one else to achieve and maintain.

Point out Edwards all you want. And he may be a hypocrite, personally, but the Democratic party has never appeared to me as very unhappy to admit humans, particularly politicians -- if you want to call them human -- are fallible.

[AladainAF]

You do understand the concept of hypocrisy, I hope? One party claims their party platform is rooted solidly in family values, whereas the other party never goes around chanting that mantra.

And surprisingly enough, both parties consist of human beings, both of whom on occasion do really stupid shit against what they preach (kinda like you said!). Its a non issue. Just like Clintons blow job, Edwards affair, etc. Non-issues.

[Cynno]

Originally Posted by AladainAF

And surprisingly enough, both parties consist of human beings, both of whom on occasion do really stupid shit against what they preach (kinda like you said!). Its a non issue. Just like Clintons blow job, Edwards affair, etc. Non-issues.

Your idiocy shows no bounds.

You probably have the reading comprehension and critical thinking skills of a 4 year old. Actually, that may be too generous, as my 4 year old niece could put two and two together in this case.

Maybe your just a troll?

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Tortfeasor

Isn't all of our manufacturing in the south?

No, it's in China.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Just another case of Republicans doing what they do best.

More South Carolina Republican Racism

Mike Green (@gopgreenhouse) on Twitter: "Just heard Obama is going to impose a 40 percent tax on aspirin because it's white and it works." http://twitter.com/gopgreenhouse

[Screamfeeder]

Originally Posted by Heylel Teomim

You're right, but "neocon" isn't an entire half of the political spectrum.

While Liberal at its core definition describes the vast majority of the political spectrum.

[Heylel Teomim]

That joke is fucking funny, and it's the sort of thing I would laugh my ass off right alongside my black friends. In a pub, after several rounds on Friday night. It has absolutely no place in politics, and that guy is a complete idiot for making the comment.

[chaos]

Originally Posted by AladainAF

And surprisingly enough, both parties consist of human beings, both of whom on occasion do really stupid shit against what they preach (kinda like you said!). Its a non issue. Just like Clintons blow job, Edwards affair, etc. Non-issues.

It's not a non-issue when the person in question is trying to legislate morals. Or bases their campaign for election around a fraudulent image of their "family values". Democrat or Republican, it should be exposed. The people are being lied to on what they are told is the most fundamental issue in the world, so yeah, fuck this guy. You want to frame yourself as the champion of some 50s American value system that never really existed, and play on people's emotions, well good for you. When you get caught getting a blowjob from a tranny in a truck stop bathroom, you deserve to lose everything and be made a mockery of.

[Haus]

Originally Posted by chaos

It's not a non-issue when the person in question is trying to legislate morals. Or bases their campaign for election around a fraudulent image of their "family values". Democrat or Republican, it should be exposed. The people are being lied to on what they are told is the most fundamental issue in the world, so yeah, fuck this guy. You want to frame yourself as the champion of some 50s American value system that never really existed, and play on people's emotions, well good for you. When you get caught getting a blowjob from a tranny in a truck stop bathroom, you deserve to lose everything and be made a mockery of.

Yes, but does that mean then that everybody of that political party is as guilty as the guy getting head from the tranny? That is the assertion that many on both sides seem quick to make. You could then argue that since many democrats are still playing partisan games in congress that Obama and the Democrats as a whole are hypocrites because of his call for "change".

Personally, I want the religiously righteous sanctimonious bastards exposed, outed, and destroyed. Because until that happens it will be nigh impossible for fiscal conservatives to actually take back control of the party.

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Haus

Yes, but does that mean then that everybody of that political party is as guilty as the guy getting head from the tranny? That is the assertion that many on both sides seem quick to make. You could then argue that since many democrats are still playing partisan games in congress that Obama and the Democrats as a whole are hypocrites because of his call for "change".

Personally, I want the religiously righteous sanctimonious bastards exposed, outed, and destroyed. Because until that happens it will be nigh impossible for fiscal conservatives to actually take back control of the party.

Well, I don't know, I think anyone who wants to legislate their morals is a pretty fucked up individual, the hypocracy of guys like Larry Craig is only one part of it. Ultimately no, you can't hold the entire party responsible, or shouldn't, but that does not excuse the individual. What Aladain said basically ammounted to "so what, Democrats do it too!" which is horseshit.

And I don't think that your example holds weight. You're trying to apply a very loose association of people who want "change" and then trying to hold them accountable because the one measure you have decided to use has not changed, at least in your estimation. That's a far cry from Ted Haggard or that silly douchebag from Louisiana who was banging the hooker, or Eliot Spitzer. These are very specific actions which go against not only the spirit of what these men stood for, but actual comments tehy have made, legislation they have supported, in Spitzer's case people he had put in jail. Your comparison is false.

I'm with you on getting rid of the fundamentalists, in both parties. Funny, the most impressive Presidential victory for Democrats in god knows how long (maybe ever) and he never could have won if he wasn't pandering to the religious in this country.

[Fury]

Originally Posted by Haus

Because until that happens it will be nigh impossible for fiscal conservatives to actually take back control of the party.

Except that the US is not generally fiscally conservative. Only one President has been able to run us in the black over the last 50 years, and that was only for a couple of years.

Link

We like to think that our leaders are all fiscally conservative, but they are not.

[Haus]

Originally Posted by Fury

Except that the US is not generally fiscally conservative. Only one President has been able to run us in the black over the last 50 years, and that was only for a couple of years.

Link

We like to think that our leaders are all fiscally conservative, but they are not.

I think it's more that we're willing to call someone who just isn't blatantly spending money without any concern whatsoever a "fiscal conservative". It's a matter of perspective. If you only ever see 350# strippers your entire life then a chick at 200# becomes "skinny".