My fellow Conservatives...please read this.

On no, not another "the media did it" guy.
At what point do you stop blaming others and start taking personal responsibility ...

The media didn't come out against equal pay initiatives for women, the media didn't promote "self deport," the media didn't write a platform that includes no provision for abortion in the case of rape or incest, the media didn't sponsor "defense of marriage" legislation.
The GOP did.
I hate to pop your fantasy bubble but those things are MINORITY positions.
Rural Americans and urban Americans have very different visions of what "America" is and what it should be.
The media didn't invent that. That's been here from the very begining.
The demographics are skewing away from you. Deal with it or lead opinion back to you - but please stop whining as if "everyone really agrees with us - it's just the media"

Dear NoDog...Fight:
1. I agree that the media/liberals would not be able to take pieces of what GOP members say and spin them to discredit Romney (who is actually leans moderate/prochoice) if these attitudes didn't already exist, plus the trend of imposing personal views onto public policy.
2. However, the media did not go out of their way to run stories comparing how Obama said embarrassing things, like the time he basically made a decision for his own daughters by saying he would not want them punished by having a baby, etc.
3. And the media did not dig up and push investigative journalism into any of the Benghazi controversy, but merely promoted the administration's chosen msg, allowed it to be stated by the moderator during the debate though it was retracted and corrected later, and did not run other pieces where Obama admitted conflicting statements until later.

The parties are not unbiased, people are not unbiased so of course the media is not going to be unbiased either. If the Democrats run on public image and popularity, and they can play the social media game to win, that is at least consistent with their policy. If Republicans promote not depending on govt but on independent decisions and management, then to be consistent they also should not depend on the media to decide what to think, but should be relying on their own perceptions and information independent of the media run by others.

I am glad and credit Romney for using his access to public media to bring out and teach points about how the economy and financial policies work, either to stifle business/job creation or to reward investment locally. The learning curve is behind for first time participants in the political process, who have never started or run their own business, and don't know the first thing about calculating business expenses as tax deductions in order to afford to hire help to grow a company, much less burdens of govt requirements and benefits. So the Republicans face an uphill battle, while many of the undereducated, unexperienced populations are being exposed to the whole political and economic system for the first time, or students who know how the system works but have never had experience managing a business to understand how much risk it takes and why overtaxing companies will not work but discourage development and reduce potential revenue and jobs.

There is no way to expect anyone to teach much less learn all that through the media!

There are no shortcuts, it will take learning these things through real life experience.

On the other hand, sending negative images and messages through the media can be done in seconds, so it is easier to run a negative campaign scaring voters, rather than trying to counteract that by promoting the good record someone might have. That would have to be done by independent research.

Romney could have tried to run negative scare ads slamming Obama, but everything was toned down. The facts that normally would speak for themselves, such as issues with Benghazi, weren't pushed by the media because the govt wasn't pushing those either.

Romney was too nice, and I hate that he lost for not being more aggressive, but I respect the higher road he took with his campaign and wish people and his own party did not punish him for that. I see more and more how the moderates blame the right wing conservative, and the conservatives blame the social moderates; if they both agreed to stick with the constitution, it is like the libertarian said, they would stay centered by basing their position on a fixed standard and not swaying here and there based on moral arguments.
That is a good point, and I hope all the Republicans, conservative and moderate, pull together and stand on the Constitution, especially to lead other parties to do the same!

If the Republicans cannot unite on Constitutional grounds, who the heck else is going?
Not changing to woo the Latino vote, but correcting all issues based on the Constitution.
Wherever the backbone of the GOP went, or got thrown out of joint, it needs to be put back in place, and let the rest of the body pivot around that. I thought it was the Constitution.
 
Yes, if the poor and middle will have to pay more, they will be poorer. If their benefits will be cut, they will be poorer still.

But that would be fair according to GOP types, as those people, even if they work hard, are not "job creators" and they do not deserve neither respect, nor compassion.

I see that your extremely limited intelligence does not allow you to understand a person who needs benefits will not be paying in to begin with. If they are in a marginal area, they will pay in, but receive more than they pay. Either way, the net effect is they don't actually pay more if at all.
 
This shows the tectonic shift in GOP mindset.

People working for small salary do not pay income taxes thanks to GOP that was. The party used to believe that cutting taxes on low incomes would encourage people to get off the welfare and get a job.

Not anymore. Now GOP is in Ayn Randian world, where the only people deserving our gratitude are "job creators" -- it is they who should have their taxes cut, and the rest should pick up the bill.
No wonder Republicans are losing elections they would comfortably won in the past.

Politcal talking point not based in reality. Please fact check how the middle and lower class pick up the tax bill. If you want cooperation, stop the lies.

Lies? It's a simple math -- if rich are going to pay less, then the rest will have to pay more. Or there will be cuts to social programs, education, Medicare and so on -- the programs that save money for the poor and middle class.

Wrong, the government just borrows the difference and having read other posts from you in this thread, I believe you know that, are a proponent of huge deficit spending and are being dishonest when you pretend otherwise.

Immie
 
You are right, and that is why the system should encourage performance by the recipients to become hardworking taxpayers where they can ern more and pay back more for the next round who need a hand up.

Those who won't try if they can try will be cut off. Period.
Yes, if the poor and middle will have to pay more, they will be poorer. If their benefits will be cut, they will be poorer still.

But that would be fair according to GOP types, as those people, even if they work hard, are not "job creators" and they do not deserve neither respect, nor compassion.

I see that your extremely limited intelligence does not allow you to understand a person who needs benefits will not be paying in to begin with. If they are in a marginal area, they will pay in, but receive more than they pay. Either way, the net effect is they don't actually pay more if at all.
 
Politcal talking point not based in reality. Please fact check how the middle and lower class pick up the tax bill. If you want cooperation, stop the lies.

Lies? It's a simple math -- if rich are going to pay less, then the rest will have to pay more. Or there will be cuts to social programs, education, Medicare and so on -- the programs that save money for the poor and middle class.

Wrong, the government just borrows the difference and having read other posts from you in this thread, I believe you know that, are a proponent of huge deficit spending and are being dishonest when you pretend otherwise.

Immie

Government can't "borrow the difference" forever. And I am not a proponent of huge deficit spending forever -- only until the economy recovers.
 
Lies? It's a simple math -- if rich are going to pay less, then the rest will have to pay more. Or there will be cuts to social programs, education, Medicare and so on -- the programs that save money for the poor and middle class.

Wrong, the government just borrows the difference and having read other posts from you in this thread, I believe you know that, are a proponent of huge deficit spending and are being dishonest when you pretend otherwise.

Immie

Government can't "borrow the difference" forever. And I am not a proponent of huge deficit spending forever -- only until the economy recovers.

No shit, Sherlock, it was you that said earlier that the government should just spend and keep on spending like there was no tomorrow.

You think that they are going to change their shitty spending habits if the economy recovers? It is not going to recover the way things are going. Obama's flooding the basement is doing nothing more than creating a massive sink hole that the poor and middle class are drowning in. Things are getting worse not better.

Immie
 
Wrong, the government just borrows the difference and having read other posts from you in this thread, I believe you know that, are a proponent of huge deficit spending and are being dishonest when you pretend otherwise.

Immie

Government can't "borrow the difference" forever. And I am not a proponent of huge deficit spending forever -- only until the economy recovers.

No shit, Sherlock, it was you that said earlier that the government should just spend and keep on spending like there was no tomorrow.

Bullshit, I was always arguing that spending cuts are bad only because they slow down the recovery.

You think that they are going to change their shitty spending habits if the economy recovers?

I don't know what are "they" going to do. I am only saying what should be done.

It is not going to recover the way things are going.

It is, and it has been for some time. Look at the employment numbers.
 
Some Americans are leeching

The problem is that the rightwing lumps everyone who is struggling in an economy they did not create as leeches. Mitt Romney did not talk about people on welfare, he talked about the 47% of Americans who do not make enough to pay federal taxes. Those were the people he said lacked personal responsibility
People struggling to raise a family on a small salary, war veterans, the elderly....all leeches in the eyes of conservatives

This shows the tectonic shift in GOP mindset.

People working for small salary do not pay income taxes thanks to GOP that was. The party used to believe that cutting taxes on low incomes would encourage people to get off the welfare and get a job.

Not anymore. Now GOP is in Ayn Randian world, where the only people deserving our gratitude are "job creators" -- it is they who should have their taxes cut, and the rest should pick up the bill.

No wonder Republicans are losing elections they would comfortably won in the past.

Low wage earners have already had their taxes cut to LESS THAN ZERO!!

They get tax CREDITS and government checks for MORE than what was withheld!

IDIOT!
 
We have suffered a major setback...there is no denying that.

The natural kneejerk reaction it's to lash out, point fingers, distance oneself from defeat.

Instead, I would ask that you take time to process the election results and thoughtfully consider the ramifications of the election, the constructive criticism that you glean from that reflection, and how we can rectify the shortfall we suffered here.

What we need is an After Action Review, not a rerun of the Blame Game.

Defeat is a fork in the road...one path leads to internal destruction, the other to strength through adversity.

Today we choose...choose wisely.


EDIT -- Before replying to this post, read the clarification here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ervatives-please-read-this-3.html#post6297400

Republican's have to change there social idea's and do better at stopping the poll workers from all the cheating. Lets look at it... they're all set up by Union workers. Case Closed.
 
I'm positive the liberals will lampoon this thread mercilessly.

They would like nothing better than to witness the self destruction of the Republican party.

Simply ignore it.

They have their motivation....we recognize it...it is no threat.

Alinsky's rules only work if you allow yourself to be cowed by them.


EDIT at 9:30...I am happy to amend this post to read "Some Liberals" as some have posted gracious comments in this thread...kudos to them.

The first thing you replied to this insightful, mature, intelligent post involves a completely untrue, hateful, divisive statement indicating you missed the point. This is not the tone the author of this thread, nor any liberals I know, are interested in continuing.

You're one of the aussie kids. fuck off.

or as we say in Canada

fuck off. :eusa_angel:

Foure toi? I'm trying to remember it. Like the keeper ous est le salle de bain;s Here's some more French: I'M A DOUCHE

What the fuck are you babbling about? va bouffer ta merde
 
We have suffered a major setback...there is no denying that.

The natural kneejerk reaction it's to lash out, point fingers, distance oneself from defeat.

Instead, I would ask that you take time to process the election results and thoughtfully consider the ramifications of the election, the constructive criticism that you glean from that reflection, and how we can rectify the shortfall we suffered here.

What we need is an After Action Review, not a rerun of the Blame Game.

Defeat is a fork in the road...one path leads to internal destruction, the other to strength through adversity.

Today we choose...choose wisely.


EDIT -- Before replying to this post, read the clarification here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ervatives-please-read-this-3.html#post6297400

Republican's have to change there social idea's and do better at stopping the poll workers from all the cheating. Lets look at it... they're all set up by Union workers. Case Closed.

Change their social ideals??????Give up Morals and hope top win? We gave up principles to win and look what that got us?

How about we actually run a Republican conservative?????Why dont we try that first before we start giving away our soul for power?
 
I personally don't see why it would make a difference if it was biological or simply a life choice if someone was gay. And again... I doubt the gay population really cares either.

Hi Shelzin:
(1) What makes the difference is both sides recognizing not all cases are the same.
Most debates deadlock because one side is saying NO cases are natural and ALL can be changed by healing the person spiritually. The other side says ALL cases are born that way and not a choice, and claims of healing people are a lie, because they were never gay at all.
So the point of proving scientifically (not by word of mouth where people discredit it as false)
would be to open minds up that both are right, some cases can be natural or unnatural.
So they quit judging them all the same, and thinking the other group is lying.

Frankly I think the government should issue "unions" to everybody regardless of what the church says.

I certainly like your thoughts on the subject... However it still feels very much like you are expecting others to change to your message, rather than changing the message to meet what those others want. I personally see that as a very big republican failing.

(2a) Yes, I agree the state can issue "unions" to prevent conflicts with church "marriage"

(2b) as for "changing to my message instead of changing to theirs"
actually, I am a progressive Democrat and Constitutionalist. So I am the one who is trying to understand and accommodate fundamentalist Christians who cannot budge on the meaning of marriage. So what I propose IS trying to help adapt to THEIR views they cannot change.

Since you thought I was a Republican trying to defend my own conservative views of marriage, I guess I should take that as a backwards compliment. You were saying I should try to accommodate others, but I was already doing that so much you thought I was pushing my own views. I must have been doing it right, then. Thank you, I guess!

I am personally open to whatever people want or don't want about gay marriage or civil unions, and asking them to keep it private and reserve the state for policies that all groups agree on. I am happy either way, and just trying to accommodate other views without conflict.

As for my own views, I would rather marriage be under the church only, where it doesn't automatically become a state thing binding you to all kinds of interference or jurisdiction by the state unless you write a prenup opting out of whatever you can. Rather keep it private, and certainly not banning anyone from getting married, where churches have full freedom.
 
I personally don't see why it would make a difference if it was biological or simply a life choice if someone was gay. And again... I doubt the gay population really cares either.

Hi Shelzin:
(1) What makes the difference is both sides recognizing not all cases are the same.
Most debates deadlock because one side is saying NO cases are natural and ALL can be changed by healing the person spiritually. The other side says ALL cases are born that way and not a choice, and claims of healing people are a lie, because they were never gay at all.
So the point of proving scientifically (not by word of mouth where people discredit it as false)
would be to open minds up that both are right, some cases can be natural or unnatural.
So they quit judging them all the same, and thinking the other group is lying.
Honestly I like the fact that you have obviously put some thought into this... But I don't think you have much experiences with the overly religious. If they think homosexuals can be healed, then... They aren't bloody likely to listen to science. They'll use science when it supports their arguments... But they'll happily ignore any science that disagrees. Honestly they tend to be worse than a partisan democrat or republican.

(2a) Yes, I agree the state can issue "unions" to prevent conflicts with church "marriage"
It is logical.

(2b) as for "changing to my message instead of changing to theirs"
actually, I am a progressive Democrat and Constitutionalist. So I am the one who is trying to understand and accommodate fundamentalist Christians who cannot budge on the meaning of marriage. So what I propose IS trying to help adapt to THEIR views they cannot change.
The majority should not adapt to the minority. I say this knowing, or at least believing based on my experiences, that the majority of Christians don't give two shits if gays get the same benefits as they do as unions are concerned. But they are uppity about them raising children.

Since you thought I was a Republican trying to defend my own conservative views of marriage, I guess I should take that as a backwards compliment. You were saying I should try to accommodate others, but I was already doing that so much you thought I was pushing my own views. I must have been doing it right, then. Thank you, I guess!
Well... You were doing it as you meant it. I don't believe that is the correct way to go. But yes... Well done considering you did do what you were attempting to.
 
Neither dems nor pubs can show any significant poll cheating: that is an extremist myth.

Yes, GOP has to change on social issues.

We have suffered a major setback...there is no denying that.

The natural kneejerk reaction it's to lash out, point fingers, distance oneself from defeat.

Instead, I would ask that you take time to process the election results and thoughtfully consider the ramifications of the election, the constructive criticism that you glean from that reflection, and how we can rectify the shortfall we suffered here.

What we need is an After Action Review, not a rerun of the Blame Game.

Defeat is a fork in the road...one path leads to internal destruction, the other to strength through adversity.

Today we choose...choose wisely.


EDIT -- Before replying to this post, read the clarification here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ervatives-please-read-this-3.html#post6297400

Republican's have to change there social idea's and do better at stopping the poll workers from all the cheating. Lets look at it... they're all set up by Union workers. Case Closed.
 
You are going to have to leave other people in other people's bedrooms and stay out of them, weirdo.

Same-sex marriage, partner and spousal benefits, etc. . . . that's over for you.

Support Roe v Wade with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Immigration reform.

Yup, you, not the rest of the party, has to change.

We have suffered a major setback...there is no denying that.

The natural kneejerk reaction it's to lash out, point fingers, distance oneself from defeat.

Instead, I would ask that you take time to process the election results and thoughtfully consider the ramifications of the election, the constructive criticism that you glean from that reflection, and how we can rectify the shortfall we suffered here.

What we need is an After Action Review, not a rerun of the Blame Game.

Defeat is a fork in the road...one path leads to internal destruction, the other to strength through adversity.

Today we choose...choose wisely.


EDIT -- Before replying to this post, read the clarification here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ervatives-please-read-this-3.html#post6297400

Republican's have to change there social idea's and do better at stopping the poll workers from all the cheating. Lets look at it... they're all set up by Union workers. Case Closed.

Change their social ideals??????Give up Morals and hope top win? We gave up principles to win and look what that got us?

How about we actually run a Republican conservative?????Why dont we try that first before we start giving away our soul for power?
 
Am I happy Obama has 4 more years? No. But I AM happy that Mitt Romney isn't President either because Americans would have gone back to sleep thinking we'd been put on the right track. As it is they're waking up. If it's too late well, we'll certainly find out won't we?

The glass is half empty. It's a Pyrrhic victory. Etc...

That is one way of looking at it. Things will not change until people have suffered enough to change. America is heading down the same path as any entitlement nation such as Greece. Entitlement system only work when you have the money, taxes/ Revenue to sustain that type of system then when the money runs out people start losing those entitlement they will take too the streets.
 
You are going to have to leave other people in other people's bedrooms and stay out of them, weirdo.

Same-sex marriage, partner and spousal benefits, etc. . . . that's over for you.

Support Roe v Wade with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Immigration reform.

Yup, you, not the rest of the party, has to change.

[]

Oooho, Fakey, you really think that you can build a winning coalition with just the "Mr. Potter" Republicans.

The GOP can't survive without these social conservatives voting against their own economic interests... you drive them out, no GOP.

Which is your case is probably the goal, anyway. Too bad you can't admit it.
 
Actually, yes . . . we can build a winning coalition without any problem.

Glad to see yourself outing as a dem. Good for you to be honest with yourself and with the rest of us.

Called you out correctly during the primaries . . . a concerned troll.

You are going to have to leave other people in other people's bedrooms and stay out of them, weirdo.

Same-sex marriage, partner and spousal benefits, etc. . . . that's over for you.

Support Roe v Wade with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Immigration reform.

Yup, you, not the rest of the party, has to change.

[]

Oooho, Fakey, you really think that you can build a winning coalition with just the "Mr. Potter" Republicans.

The GOP can't survive without these social conservatives voting against their own economic interests... you drive them out, no GOP.

Which is your case is probably the goal, anyway. Too bad you can't admit it.
 
You are going to have to leave other people in other people's bedrooms and stay out of them, weirdo.

Same-sex marriage, partner and spousal benefits, etc. . . . that's over for you.

Support Roe v Wade with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Immigration reform.

Yup, you, not the rest of the party, has to change.

[]

Oooho, Fakey, you really think that you can build a winning coalition with just the "Mr. Potter" Republicans.

The GOP can't survive without these social conservatives voting against their own economic interests... you drive them out, no GOP.

Which is your case is probably the goal, anyway. Too bad you can't admit it.

Fucking Irony of this post Pot calling kettle black :badgrin:
 
You are going to have to leave other people in other people's bedrooms and stay out of them, weirdo.

Same-sex marriage, partner and spousal benefits, etc. . . . that's over for you.

Support Roe v Wade with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Immigration reform.

Yup, you, not the rest of the party, has to change.

[]

Oooho, Fakey, you really think that you can build a winning coalition with just the "Mr. Potter" Republicans.

The GOP can't survive without these social conservatives voting against their own economic interests... you drive them out, no GOP.

Which is your case is probably the goal, anyway. Too bad you can't admit it.

There have always been social conservatives and bible Thumpers..republicans used to be able to ignore them
 

Forum List

Back
Top