Frankly, I hope the GOP completely embraces Rob Port’s recommendations.
If Republicans want to keep winning elections like they have been in recent years they need get back to some of the core conservative values that caused them to be swept into the majority in Congress over a decade ago.I m talking about shrinking the size of the government. Real cuts in spending, not just reductions in the rate of spending growth. Radical tax reform. Social Security reform. Term limits. A tough stance on illegal immigration.
Why? Because it is most surely a recipe for Democratic gains. Look at the last three elections we’ve had on a national basis. In 2000, the Republicans lost the mass vote and won the White House on a Supreme Court decided technicality — and George Bush only did that well by running as the sort of conservative that would increase spending on domestic policies (I believe it was that mythical concept known as “compassionate conservatism”). In 2002 and 2004 the GOP has capitalized on the Democratic schizophrenia with regard to national security. The Republicans offer a message that is simplistic but dumb, but at least they offer a message of some sort. The Democrats, still at the mercy of an insular class of Washington consultants who care much more for their bulging pockets than the direction of the country, have offered no coherent message and have offered no partywide support to those who have voiced a position that is not only morally right but is now in the majority (Jack Murtha, Howard Dean). I don’t know how long the Republican strategy of screaming “9/11″ like a crazed lunatic in the gutter can last, but it’s clear that’s the well the GOP is going to once again.
Now Rob wants them to throw that all away by pursuing what has been by most accounts an amazingly unpopular agenda in domestic politics. I don’t completely blame Rob for believing these myths, that’s what happens in a media environment where you accept Rush Limbaugh and Fox News as legitimate news sources.
In 2005 the centerpiece of George Bush’s state of the union speech was social security “reform”, aka privatization. The outcome makes clear why he didn’t campaign on the issue in 2004 against John Kerry — it is quite possibly the most unpopular crusade the right has undertaken, while also being the wet dream of Cato, Heritage and Wall Street.
The Republican congress effectively decided to privatize a substantial portion of Medicare. As a Democrat I beg of the GOP to promise more “innovations” like the disastrous Medicare Part D.
Then there’s the prospect of Republican candidates running around promising to “starve the beast”, aka cutting vital social programs while enlarging corporate welfare. Sadly, we now have a shorthand in our culture for what happens when the government decides to abandon its role in our society: Katrina.
And if the Republican party chooses to continue supporting their version of border security in the form of the anti-hispanic Minutemen, I say full steam ahead. Nothing supports Democratic rhetoric about Republicans encouraging discrimination than Republicans actually supporting discrimination.
Then again, the Republicans could run on a platform of zero tolerance towards abortion, if they could only get their leader to actually say that he’s “pro-life” (or even better, anti abortion) and actually be caught on tape with one or two of the hardcore antichoice lobby.
Now, one domestic initiative the Republicans could undertake is removing big criminal money from politics. They just have to bail half of their party out of jail first.
Just like the right-wing is urging the left to continue to “Bash Bush’,
I certainly hope the ‘intelligentsia’ listen to this advice.
Dems could win with 60% if they do.
Oliver please elaborate on what is “morally right”. Also, if you have advice to give to the left, why do you say follow Howard Dean? If anyone has caused the dislike of the left, it is Howard Dean. By the way, atleast you admit that the left doesn’t have a message.
ian,
Riiiiiight. Rush, Coulter, Hannity, Rove, Dubya, et al were just marching arm-in-arm with Michael Moore before Dean came along.
I do always tend to forget that.
“Then there s the prospect of Republican candidates running around promising to starve the beast , aka cutting vital social programs”
Typical liberal scare tactic. When Clinton does it, it’s welfare reform.
When somebody suggests Republicans get back to scaling back the scope of the federal government, including reducing overall spending without actually going into details, it’s cutting vital social programs.
Nice pretzel logic you got going there.
“while enlarging corporate welfare. Sadly, we now have a shorthand in our culture for what happens when the government decides to abandon its role in our society: Katrina.”
And you have yet to even utter one word of criticism for Ray Nagin or Kathleen Blanco about that entire mess.
Spoken like a good Democratic soldier.
I guess by your logic, I shouldn’t own home owners insurance. Because the government should just take care of me if my house burns down.
“And if the Republican party chooses to continue supporting their version of border security in the form of the anti-hispanic Minutemen, I say full steam ahead. Nothing supports Democratic rhetoric about Republicans encouraging discrimination than Republicans actually supporting discrimination.”
Anti-Hispanic? No. Just another typical liberal scare tactic since you don’t really have any argument to counter their cause.
Fact is, Oliver, they’re not anti-Hispanic or against any ethnic group. I personally welcome any legal immigrant to this country as it’s the basis for the foundation of, culturally, what we are as a nation today.
But forgive me if I don’t care too much for the illegal alien marching across the border in Arizona and destroying the livestock of a ranch owner who, unfortunately, has committed the crime of having a ranch too close to the border.
“Then again, the Republicans could run on a platform of zero tolerance towards abortion, if they could only get their leader to actually say that he s pro-life (or even better, anti abortion) and actually be caught on tape with one or two of the hardcore antichoice lobby.”
You’re just full of scare tactics today, aren’t you? You must not realize that if Roe V. Wade were overturned today, the issue would simply be remanded by the states. 12 of which already have laws allowing abortion on the books.
I’ll stop now and let your feeble brain comprehend what I’ve said. Hate to see that twinkie-infested thing of yours in your head explode.
Rob’s not a terribly deep thinker. Sort of like Ian. Both live off allowances from the parents and tend to view the world from the comfy vantage point of being provided for all your needs brings.
Most Repugs are for the idea of smaller Government. Of course, they’re not for the actual practice when smaller Government may mean their jobs or subsidies may be lost. IOW, they’re all for cuts as long as it’s in somebody else’s district. Of course, the Repug in the other district has the very same notion. For Ian and Rob, there’s a blissful ignorance; the allowance has always rolled in–why would it ever stop?
Jade,
Filed that charge against Rob yet?
You haven’t?
Pussy.
Hey, Brandi, don’t get upset with OW. He’s telling Repugs they should adopt Robbie’s ideas. You seem to agree with the well-rounded Rob–so where’s the disagreement?
Why aren’t you urging Repugs to campaign on a message of smaller Govt? Tell folks that SS should be dismantled and that heathcare is pretty much wasted on old people and kids.
Brandon: Enlist yet? Of course not–but we already know why, right?
Ian: Sorry if the truth hurts.
One day the allowance may end, although Rob Port is something of a legend in keeping that revenue stream open into one’s mid-20s.
WRT question, it’s not a ‘yes or no’ answer. I certainly supported going after Al Qaeda and their sponsors in the Taliban. But since I am several things you are not (educated, a vet, etc.), I understood that in prosecuting a war in Afghanistan, we’d have to: 1. finish the job; 2. leave Afghanistan in a better condition so another Taliban, or clone, doesn’t gain a foothold.
We did neither. The Taliban and AlQaeda still flourish. Afghanistan is a basket case with warlords, Taliban, and other crooks running rampant. Essentially, we’ve condemned the citizens of Afghanistan to perhaps a worse fate (if that’s possible) than they had under Taliban rule.
Jadegold, if you just put an ounce of your hate into something useful, say getting a job, then your “life” would be a whole lot more useful.
Anyways, did you or did you not support the war in afghanistan? Yes or no, please.
Jade, Ian and Brandon haven’t ever grown up from the comic book world of good and evil. This simplistic worldview is exploited by the neocons so that these simpletons will do their bidding.
Trouble is, we’re not always the white hats, and they (whoever “they” are today, first we hate the Iraqis, then they are our partners in Democracy) aren’t always the black hats.
The reason the simpletons like Ian and Brandon act this way is because you are robbing them of their innocence- now they actually have to think instead of blindly accept what their parents/government tells them.
Many cons live in this black and white world because it challenges their brains too much to live in the real world.
http://thepoliticalteen.net/2005/09/17/commentpolicy/
Short and to the point
- Words like dumbass, idiot, or any expletive will not be tolerated. Your comment will be deleted on sight and you will not be informed. Remember attack the argument, not the commenter.
- No off topic discussion. If you are not going to comment on the subject of the post then you shouldn t bother posting.
- Do not put random links in a post. Links must pertain to the post.
I have spent way too much of my time deleting comments that personally attack me and others. Frankly I don t care if you attack me, you re just wasting your time.
I am considering closing comments on some of my posts because the trolls are uncontrollable. If you can t make an intelligent comment then you shouldn t bother making one at all.
This is your tos, ian, why the hypocracy? Your post doesn’t meet the “standards” for your own blog!
Spelling flames *shudder*.
No, Ian, we love this country, we want to make it better. You love the neocons, not this country.
I still find it interesting that the way you conduct yourself on this blog would be banned on your own blog. Hypocrite.
Come back when you grow pubes, I’m done with you.
I think that you meant to use the term “hypocrisy”. The first rule of attempting to making someone look like an ass is spelling everything correctly.
Anyways, it would only be “hypocracy” if I broke those rules on my blog. Oliver doesn’t have a ToS, so therefore what you just said is useless. I was simply replying to a hater, with, well, hate?
I just find it funny that you keep using the allowance line when I earn a large revenue from my website.
And where do you get the idea that I have “invested a lot by defending Bush”. I don’t think I have said anything about Bush in this thread, much less a lot in this whole site.
Jadegold, did you get enough love as a child?
Exactly, FactCheck.
As I always say, the world’s a complex place with complex problems demanding complex solutions. And, sometimes, those solutions may be less than optimal.
The Repugs are selling the idea that it’s a black-and-white world and the solutions to its problems can fit on a bumpersticker. Not only are the solutions easy, they don’t involve any sacrifice or hardship–just unquestioning belief.
Brandon and Ian and Rob Port aside (they’re basically ignorant), there are Repugs who understand complexity and that hard problems require some very tough choices. Unfortunately, these few also have invested a lot by defending Bush and are unable to admit being duped.
By the way, if you all think we live in such a terrible country, why not leave?
A few weeks ago, a friend of a friend said something like “I rather live in Turkey than America” and I said, why not just move to Turkey then, and she shut the fuck up. You libs talk a good game, but you can’t back it up with any actions other than use the power of your hands.
Jade, these guys investing their whole lot with Bush and the Neocons is right on. There are some thoughtful cons on this blog, at least sometimes, but I can’t help thinking that in 15 years Ian and his ilk will be like Franz Leibkind in The Producers.
You ever see that movie/musical/movie? He’s the guy still wearing the German uniform 15 years after the war ends, still venerating Hitler, still thinking his ideology will win out. We certainly had some like him here in the US long after Nixon was excreted from the White House.
Wow, you’re not following the rules. You hypocrite.
Pubes? I’m nearly 18.
Can you please explain to me how I am a neocon? You liberals love to categorize people, so please explain why I fall under ‘neocon’.
Another Nazi reference, what a surprise.
FactCheck, I really don’t blame Ian. He’s just some socially dysfunctional kid (read: no dates) who has found he can gain some measure of approval from conservative white males who swoon at his regurgitations of Limbaugh’s shtick.
It’s a little like watching that perverse video clip of Jon-Benet Ramsey do her little risque cheesecake song-and-dance.
Ian’s little song-and-dance is a novelty act like that fat kid who writes for World Nut Daily. However, Ian’s outgrowing the only thing the Repugs take an interest in. He’s like Gary Coleman who was adorable when he was 7 or 8 but the scripts stopped coming when he was 23.
Oliver writes,
“As a Democrat I beg of the GOP to promise more innovations like the disastrous Medicare Part D.”
And the effort by Democrats to kill Medicare part D was …? Funny, I kinda remember the Democrats supporting the plan. It was conservatives (Limbaugh particularly comes to mind) who opposed the plan and criticized the Bush administration for implementing it.
Continuing,
“Nothing supports Democratic rhetoric about Republicans encouraging discrimination than Republicans actually supporting discrimination.”
And nothing supports Republican rhetoric about Democrats encouraging illegal immigration than Democrats actually supporting illegal immigration, by derailing efforts to enforce border security. What part of “illegal” does the Democratic party have difficulty understanding?
Also, the Republican party has never had a “zero tolerance” platform regarding abortion. Republicans oppose partial birth abortion (which is simply a polite term for infanticide) and they oppose federal funding for abortion. They also support the effort to overturn Roe v. Wade insomuch as it would put the abortion question back in the hands of states. You know, that whole “democracy” thing.
One more thing — if Democrats want to win elections, they need to be careful how they handle the NSA eavesdropping issue, especially if America gets hit again by suicide bombers or terrorists with shoulder-launched missles. If the Democrats convey the notion that they were instrumental in upsetting or crippling domestic security, then they are cooked. Period.
A comprehensive plan outlining a “better” foreign policy toward Iran, particularly how to keep nukes out of their hands, would be nice too.
BTW, you might want to change the title of this post, or else risk Teddy Kennedy and Bill Clinton showing up here looking for a little action.
If the left just put an ounce of its hate towards something useful — like getting a job — then you all might be taken seriously. If it wasn’t for the media on your side, then you all would be nothing.
Jadegold, please stop playing the line that you “served”. Please, no one believes that bullshit anymore.
Jadegold, I don’t understand where you get this “Socially dysfunctional” part from. You are the one who is available to immediatly respond to my comments. No friends?
“By the way, if you all think we live in such a terrible country, why not leave?”
Did you really write this, Ian? Seriously? Why not leave? And you think the chickenhawk argument is stale. Jeebus do you know how old this line is? Close to 18 going on 4.
I was never that dumb at “nearly 18″. I was never that dumb period. But seriously, people please give up the pissing matches and either agree/disagree with what I posted. I’m kind of tired of the other stuff.
I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. What I don’t need is unrelated personal attacks.
Ok well I assume you are not speaking to me, or just to me?
Then why bother posting stuff? Do you not want to hear how wrong you are?
By the way, when you’re ignorant, you don’t know how dumb you are.