Republican Morality

[Dr.Drock]

Hard as it is sometimes, let's try to refrain from 'you are,' 'no, you are' replies.

I am always amazed at the revisionist mentality of the right when it comes to religious values of the past and apologetics for the words of their representatives. Not one republican noted that the words of Newt and others are mean spirited nonsense. That is what they are, and to not face that fact is immoral and/or dishonest. Or just so deeply embedded in the memes of the right wing that they are truths for partisan republicans. A truly sad bunch of Americans and the reason our congress is now full of the same.

Poverty is increasing in this nation and republican governors are using a jim crow tactic, call it whatever you like but that is what they are doing. Are democratic governors doing the same? As far as the republican war on the working poor, that too is as obvious as the nose on your face. And if you want more proof to ignore see this site. Evil Republicans Making War on the Poor; Touting Victims of the Shutdown That Never Happened

The following quote exemplifies the power and sophistication propaganda has had on the minds of republicans today. Reality remains hidden from them and they even argue it away. "You start out in 1954 by saying, “******, ******, ******.” By 1968 you can’t say “******” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a by-product of them is blacks [working poor of all shades] get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “******, ******.” Lee Atwater, Republican strategist, 1981, describing the Southern Strategy

Your entire thread is based on you saying "you are" to republicans, but others can't do it?

Okie dokie

 

[BluePhantom]

I am always amazed at the revisionist mentality of the right when it comes to religious values of the past and apologetics for the words of their representatives. Not one republican noted that the words of Newt and others are mean spirited nonsense. That is what they are, and to not face that fact is immoral and/or dishonest. Or just so deeply embedded in the memes of the right wing that they are truths for partisan republicans. A truly sad bunch of Americans and the reason our congress is now full of the same.

Poverty is increasing in this nation and republican governors are using a jim crow tactic, call it whatever you like but that is what they are doing. Are democratic governors doing the same? As far as the republican war on the working poor, that too is as obvious as the nose on your face. And if you want more proof to ignore see these sites. Evil Republicans Making War on the Poor; Touting Victims of the Shutdown That Never Happened

Midcan....don't you think the sources you posted might be just slightly biased? I mean it would be a little like me claiming that black people suck and supporting it with an op-ed from the grand wizard of the ku-klux-klan. It's not the most credible source of information, ya know?

Could you provide some supporting evidence about us evil Republicans that's not an op-ed from an ultra-progressive website?

 

[Wiseacre]

I am always amazed at the revisionist mentality of the right when it comes to religious values of the past and apologetics for the words of their representatives. Not one republican noted that the words of Newt and others are mean spirited nonsense. That is what they are, and to not face that fact is immoral and/or dishonest. Or just so deeply embedded in the memes of the right wing that they are truths for partisan republicans. A truly sad bunch of Americans and the reason our congress is now full of the same.

Poverty is increasing in this nation and republican governors are using a jim crow tactic, call it whatever you like but that is what they are doing. Are democratic governors doing the same? As far as the republican war on the working poor, that too is as obvious as the nose on your face. And if you want more proof to ignore see these sites. Evil Republicans Making War on the Poor; Touting Victims of the Shutdown That Never Happened

Midcan....don't you think the sources you posted might be just slightly biased? I mean it would be a little like me claiming that black people suck and supporting it with an op-ed from the grand wizard of the ku-klux-klan. It's not the most credible source of information, ya know?

Could you provide some supporting evidence about us evil Republicans that's not an op-ed from an ultra-progressive website?

And he claims that as proof. Then he claims repubs are for the return of Jim Crow laws, which is absolute bullshit. I have never seen anybody call for any legislation based on race, so that is a total lie.

 

[Jackson]

Why do republicans hate the poor but love the rich?

"If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered." Proverbs 21:13

What can one make of the statements below?

"If you're low-income...in many states you can qualify for Medicaid, you can qualify for food stamps, you can qualify for housing assistance, [even] if you're in poverty...That is not a healthy thing for children, it's not a healthy thing for society...Suffering, if you're a Christian, suffering is a part of life. And it's not a bad thing, it is an essential thing in life...There are all different ways to suffer. One way to suffer is through lack of food and shelter and there's another way to suffer which is lack of dignity and hope." Rick

"Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works. So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of 'I do this and you give me cash,' unless it's illegal." ¶ "You have a very poor neighborhood. You have kids who are required under law to go to school. They have no money. They have no habit of work. What if you paid them part-time in the afternoon to sit at the clerical office and greet people when they came in? What if you paid them to work as the assistant librarian? And I'd pay them as early as is reasonable and practical. ¶ "I am prepared to find something that works, that breaks us out of the cycles we're involved in right now, and finding a way for poor children to learn how to work and learning how to have money that they've earned honestly is an integral part of that." Newt

Note to Rick and Newt's mom, Mrs Mom you raised an awful child.

Who was it that said the past is never past. They missed Newt.

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." Matthew 6:24

Why do republicans hate the poor but love the rich?

Bleeding Heart Tightwads

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.Op-Ed Columnist - Bleeding Heart Tightwads - NYTimes.com

Republicans Give More to Charity than Democrats - New Research
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTRvmMMf8_I]Republicans Give More to Charity than Democrats - New Research - YouTube[/ame]

 

[BluePhantom]

Why do republicans hate the poor but love the rich?

Bleeding Heart Tightwads

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.Op-Ed Columnist - Bleeding Heart Tightwads - NYTimes.com

Republicans Give More to Charity than Democrats - New Research
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTRvmMMf8_I]Republicans Give More to Charity than Democrats - New Research - YouTube[/ame]

I have brought that up to them twice already Jackson. They simply ignore it and continue to post that Republicans are evil pricks attacking the poor.

 

[midcan5]

There is so much weak thinking and irrelevant comment from the right wing republicans and conservatives in this thread, whole books could be written on how the puppeteers control the right today.

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." Dom Helder Camara

I have given to United Way for over forty years, we give to UNICEF, the Salvation Army, and Catholic Charities, all do a pretty good job, especially Catholic Charities and the Salvation Army. We also donate lots to Goodwill. Never have we been asked for our political affiliation, nor have I been asked if I was liberal or conservative. The idea that republicans and conservatives, as the two are interchangeable in this online discussion of the claim, are more charitable is not only not scientifically or reasonable unprovable but given the topic of this thread rather ironic. This bit of malarkey [study] that poses as fact found what it was looking for, and the naive believe it without thought because it fits their worldview.

I addressed the issue here too from a similar religious POV. http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-charity-when-liberals-are-3.html#post3393637

=========

The complaint that all information from a progressive site is biased would lead us to the conclusion that all information is biased as the comment does not address the content of the presumed bias. What is bias by the way? If all information is biased why do you select yours as fact? There are answers to that question and we have addressed them elsewhere. We started with quotes from republicans, quotes mind you, and yet the messenger is shot and additional confirmation is called biased. The proof is in the pudding and I have given lots already. If you want to believe anything at all, the world is flat, do so, but if you cannot argue with substantive information that counters the OP then you need to shut up or appear brain washed.

==========

Your entire thread is based on you saying "you are" to republicans, but others can't do it?

(Hard as it is sometimes, let's try to refrain from 'you are,' 'no, you are' replies.) This comment was addressed to the posts above it. If you are going to say, you are something, please back it up with supporting evidence. Threads go on and on with two or more posters, who don't like each other just name calling.

==========

More data less baloney and if you find these biased that just could be you.

Can We Blame Income Inequality on Republicans? - Slate Magazine


"Inequality as Policy" http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/inequality-policy-2009-10.pdf


"The irony of the Cold War's capitalism vs. communism paradigm is that capitalism in the US and other western countries required generous helpings of socialism to make it work. Conservative politicians [I would call them moderate to liberal repubs] like Eisenhower and Nixon seemed to understand this and generally supported the social programs listed above.

Since the Reagan Administration, Republicans, with help from Democrats, have worked to dismantle such programs and policies. Since 2008, the conservative movement has been galvanized by President Barack Obama's victory (although Mr. Obama's actions in office hardly place him on the left), leading to the formation of the Tea Party and igniting the conflict in Wisconsin over Gov. Scott Walker's plan to cut benefits for public-sector employees and abolish collective bargaining rights." Which Side Are You On? New Language for a New Political Reality | Common Dreams


Given a chance the poor do better? http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/124423-the-poor-always-pay.html
Wealth distribution Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power



"President Eisenhower describes his administration's political philosophy as 'dynamic conservatism,' then as 'progressive, dynamic conservatism,' then as 'progressive moderation,' then as 'moderate progressivism,' and then as 'positive progressivism.'" William Manchester

 

[JoeB131]

There is so much weak thinking and irrelevant comment from the right wing republicans and conservatives in this thread, whole books could be written on how the puppeteers control the right today.

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." Dom Helder Camara


I addressed the issue here too from a similar religious POV. http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-charity-when-liberals-are-3.html#post3393637

i think the problem here is you fail to understand the difference between charity and coercion.

When I choose to give to a charity, it is a charity of my choice, which I know will do good work. I look at ones that have low overhead and a history of good work.

WHen the government takes 30% of my income and gives it to people who want to sit around all day, make babies and vote for Democrats, that isn't my choice, and it's a pretty terrible idea.

 

[Si modo]

There is so much weak thinking and irrelevant comment from the right wing republicans and conservatives in this thread, whole books could be written on how the puppeteers control the right today.

....

Of course the one who is called out on all of his/her false premises would think those call-outs are weak and irrelevant.



You can always start over with premises with foundation. Or just keep flailing away.

 

[BOBO]

...only begotten wisdom so "ALL" Americans could be wealthy, $tatu$y & Big Shot...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxtT2SdZ8ZU]BIG DOG - New Ron Paul Ad - YouTube[/ame]

When someone, anyone, can show me something republicans have done for America that is good for America, I'll stop picking on them. Preaching and engaging in stereotypes and just plain stupid talk doesn't count.

As an addendum I could add why do other republicans (above) apologize for statements that are mean spirited, wrong, and code for the neanderthals among us?

This is about the working poor, it is about real people who work everyday, it is not about the image in the right wing mind of the Cadillac mom - a made up myth by the way. People born into privilege lead lives that today exist in a place the working poor can only dream about. http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...h-should-not-be-taxed-more-7.html#post4391251

Our nation would be fine without the rich. The assumption that the rich create jobs is easily disputed today as we have more rich than ever and less jobs. Sometimes money and wealth are created, not through positive acts for the society that supports their endeavors, but by acts such as outsourcing and tax loopholes that are not positive.

The Empathy Ceiling: The Rich Are Different

What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

 

[BluePhantom]

i think the problem here is you fail to understand the difference between charity and coercion.

When I choose to give to a charity, it is a charity of my choice, which I know will do good work. I look at ones that have low overhead and a history of good work.

WHen the government takes 30% of my income and gives it to people who want to sit around all day, make babies and vote for Democrats, that isn't my choice, and it's a pretty terrible idea.

Reminds me of a joke I am sure we have all heard:

Obama and Romney were walking down the street and they came across a homeless man sitting on the sidewalk. Romney pulled $50 out of his pocket and said to the man "go get something to eat and get a room at the YMCA around the corner. Then come by my office tomorrow at noon and I will give you a job so that you can get back on your feet." Obama was incredibly impressed and as they walked some more they ran into another homeless man. Obama reached into Romney's pocket, pulled out $50, kept $30 of it as an administrative fee, handed the man a $20 and said "Burger King is across the street and the welfare office is around the corner. Vote for me and there's more where that came from."

That's the difference between Republican charity and liberal charity.

 

[BluePhantom]

There is so much weak thinking and irrelevant comment from the right wing republicans and conservatives in this thread, whole books could be written on how the puppeteers control the right today.

....

Of course the one who is called out on all of his/her false premises would think those call-outs are weak and irrelevant.



You can always start over with premises with foundation. Or just keep flailing away.

She'll choose the latter. The problem with people like her is that they are so completely sold on their party's propaganda that they think "well if Rachel Madcow says it, it must be absolutely true." I hear liberals bitch about blind obedience in regards to the Bible so often, but they do the exact same thing....except their Bible is the Daily Kos.

 

[Si modo]

i think the problem here is you fail to understand the difference between charity and coercion.

When I choose to give to a charity, it is a charity of my choice, which I know will do good work. I look at ones that have low overhead and a history of good work.

WHen the government takes 30% of my income and gives it to people who want to sit around all day, make babies and vote for Democrats, that isn't my choice, and it's a pretty terrible idea.

Reminds me of a joke I am sure we have all heard:

Obama and Romney were walking down the street and they came across a homeless man sitting on the sidewalk. Romney pulled $50 out of his pocket and said to the man "go get something to eat and get a room at the YMCA around the corner. Then come by my office tomorrow at noon and I will give you a job so that you can get back on your feet." Obama was incredibly impressed and as they walked some more they ran into another homeless man. Obama reached into Romney's pocket, pulled out $50, kept $30 of it as an administrative fee, handed the man a $20 and said "Burger King is across the street and the welfare office is around the corner. Vote for me and there's more where that came from."

That's the difference between Republican charity and liberal charity.

Bleeding heart liberal proverb: Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you've lost his vote.

 

[midcan5]

There is so much weak thinking and irrelevant comment from the right wing republicans and conservatives in this thread, whole books could be written on how the puppeteers control the right today.

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." Dom Helder Camara


I addressed the issue here too from a similar religious POV. http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-charity-when-liberals-are-3.html#post3393637

i think the problem here is you fail to understand the difference between charity and coercion.

When I choose to give to a charity, it is a charity of my choice, which I know will do good work. I look at ones that have low overhead and a history of good work.

WHen the government takes 30% of my income and gives it to people who want to sit around all day, make babies and vote for Democrats, that isn't my choice, and it's a pretty terrible idea.

Again your comment does not address the premise of the opinion piece, but since we entered this area I'll reply with a more rational explanation. Did you read my link?

Charity is charity, coercion is irrelevant here. Because you have this connection in your mind/brain/thoughts that government is taking your money and giving it to some lazy slob, you can engage in this irrational reasoning. But even a second of your time to think, would demonstrate your taxes go to lots of things, many of which you use everyday - even this medium we are debating on. I know perfectly well what coercion is, and I know what the government does with my taxes - my charity and my taxes have no connection. Are all my taxes well spent - that could open a Pandora's box of items wasteful and inefficient but again irrelevant to charity.

Your comment is racist code too, are you aware of that? See the quote below. I know everyone will say this is the race card, but you know what calling a spade, a spade is, right? Thanks though, I'm still waiting for a real challenge but you gave it a shot.

The rest of the replies are the usual circle jerk of congratulatory groupthink. That's fine but doesn't address my central point that republicans are bad news for the poor. You demonstrate that too well with your coded thinking that looks in the wrong direction for answers.

“******, ******, ******.” By 1968 you can’t say “******” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a by-product of them is blacks [working poor of all shades] get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “******, ******.” Lee Atwater, Republican strategist, 1981, describing the Southern Strategy

===================================== Edit PS

JoeB131,

Here's another example of stereotypical thinking, BluePhantom calls me a "she," I'll let you figure out why - but consider Si Modo is a she, does she take offense at his use? Does she see it? Does she understand it? Do you?

mc5

 

[BluePhantom]

Again your comment does not address the premise of the opinion piece, but since we entered this area I'll reply with a more rational explanation. Did you read my link?

Charity is charity, coercion is irrelevant here. Because you have this connection in your mind/brain/thoughts that government is taking your money and giving it to some lazy slob, you can engage in this irrational reasoning. But even a second of your time to think, would demonstrate your taxes go to lots of things, many of which you use everyday - even this medium we are debating on.

Midcan, you are a total partisan tool. Do you honestly think Republicans are not willing to help people who have fallen on hard times? We have no issue helping someone who is down on their luck and I and others have posted several links to several different studies that show that Republicans do that more than liberals do. All you have provided is your refusal to accept it supported by a link to a post you made offering your opinion.

What pisses Republicans off are people who abuse the system and it should piss you off too. We don't have an issue helping the disabled or those who through no fault of their own have fallen on hard times. But believe me there are puh-lenty of lazy slobs who are perfectly happy to suckle the government teat for their entire lives while doing the minimum amount of effort. THAT'S the piss off. The problem is that when we help people ourselves we can check out who we are helping. The government is terrible when it comes to that. See link below:

Welfare recipient lives in million-dollar home

Your comment is racist code too, are you aware of that? See the quote below. I know everyone will say this is the race card, but you know what calling a spade, a spade is, right? Thanks though, I'm still waiting for a real challenge but you gave it a shot.

The only one making any reference to race is you. Racist code my rosy red ass. You know what "racist code" means? It means a liberal just took an ass whupping and is now trying to shift the focus of debate. You are the one that seems to be suggesting that only black people "make babies and vote for Democrats." Here in Salem, Oregon I can point you to a whole shitload of white people who make babies and vote for Democrats. And we're racist?

 

[Wiseacre]

" That's fine but doesn't address my central point that republicans are bad news for the poor. "


Are you familiar with the term "tough love"? Essentially it means you force your kids to make it on their own so they can become independent and productive members of society. That is the foundation upon which self esteem and the respect of others is built. Doesn't mean you let 'em drown, but it does mean you do not pay for their mistakes.

If you don't pursue a path of tough love, in many cases you foster a dependence that is very unfortunate for them as well as you. And it is high time that lib/dems realize that we just don't have the fucking money, and raising taxes higher will not feed the bulldog. I know lib/dems don't want to believe it, they cling to the absurd idea that raising taxes by $80 billion a year is going to solve a $1.5 trillion deficit. But it's fairy tale fantasy dreaming, all you and up with is more debt and a stalled economy.

Which is precisely what republican morality is all about, preventing more debt and a stalled economy.

 

[Si modo]

Again your comment does not address the premise of the opinion piece, but since we entered this area I'll reply with a more rational explanation. Did you read my link?

Charity is charity, coercion is irrelevant here. Because you have this connection in your mind/brain/thoughts that government is taking your money and giving it to some lazy slob, you can engage in this irrational reasoning. But even a second of your time to think, would demonstrate your taxes go to lots of things, many of which you use everyday - even this medium we are debating on.

Midcan, you are a total partisan tool. Do you honestly think Republicans are not willing to help people who have fallen on hard times? We have no issue helping someone who is down on their luck and I and others have posted several links to several different studies that show that Republicans do that more than liberals do. All you have provided is your refusal to accept it supported by a link to a post you made offering your opinion.

What pisses Republicans off are people who abuse the system and it should piss you off too. We don't have an issue helping the disabled or those who through no fault of their own have fallen on hard times. But believe me there are puh-lenty of lazy slobs who are perfectly happy to suckle the government teat for their entire lives while doing the minimum amount of effort. THAT'S the piss off. The problem is that when we help people ourselves we can check out who we are helping. The government is terrible when it comes to that. See link below:

Welfare recipient lives in million-dollar home

Your comment is racist code too, are you aware of that? See the quote below. I know everyone will say this is the race card, but you know what calling a spade, a spade is, right? Thanks though, I'm still waiting for a real challenge but you gave it a shot.

The only one making any reference to race is you. Racist code my rosy red ass. You are the one that seems to be suggesting that only black people "make babies and vote for Democrats." Here in Salem, Oregon I can point you to a whole shitload of white people who make babies and vote for Democrats. And we're racist?

You're racist against whites?

OMG.

Well, we all saw the "racist code" and we all know that the majority of welfare recipients are white.

(I have yet to receive my government-issued decoder book, so I'm going with the racist expert on what 'code' is.)

 

[BluePhantom]

JoeB131,

Here's another example of stereotypical thinking, BluePhantom calls me a "she," I'll let you figure out why - but consider Si Modo is a she, does she take offense at his use? Does she see it? Does she understand it? Do you?

mc5

I call you "she" because on a different thread someone referred to you as such and because I can't see you, you made no mention of it at that time, and your gender is not defined on your profile, I made the assumption you were a woman. My bad. Jeez. Why do you assume that it was an insult instead of a simple error?

 

[Si modo]

....

JoeB131,

Here's another example of stereotypical thinking, BluePhantom calls me a "she," I'll let you figure out why - but consider Si Modo is a she, does she take offense at his use? Does she see it? Does she understand it? Do you?

mc5

Why the ever-living fuck would I take offense to someone being called a "she"? Is it some sort of insult to you? Being called a "she"?

OMG! The horrrrrrrrrrror! The humaaaaaaaaaaanity!

And, although I think I knew you were a guy, I still wasn't sure and/or could not remember. I figured you would correct someone if it was important to you.

But who knew that being called a woman was so offensive????????

Personally, I think it's a compliment, so I suppose I'm a sexist of another sort.

 

[midcan5]

Again the discussion is about republican policies and their effect on the working classes in America. I am looking for counter arguments, not speculation on my partisanship. It would not matter if I were a Martian if the OP were true. I think it is. More data below. As time provides I'll look and read and post more evidence.

I may have been wrong on your use of 'She' but since it changed from post 52 to 58 I made an assumption. And bold is a bit odd. Assumptions can be wrong. My profile could not be any clearer.

HARPER'S INDEX Oct 2011

"Percentage of the current U.S. debt that was accumulated during Republican presidential terms: 71
Portion of debt-ceiling elevations since 1960 that have been signed into law by Republican presidents : 2/3
Percentage of profits American corporations paid in taxes in 1961 : 40.6 Today: 10.5
Portion of the increase in U.S. corporate profit margins since 2001 that come from depressed wages: 3/4
Percentage of Americans who say they did not have money to buy food at all times last year: 18.2
Percentage change in the median household wealth of white families since 2005 : -16
Of Hispanic families: -66 "

October 2011, page 15 (Harper's Magazine)

 

[BluePhantom]

Again the discussion is about republican policies and their effect on the working classes in America. I am looking for counter arguments, not speculation on my partisanship.

No Midcan....you did not "start a discussion about Republican policies and their effect on the working class in an effort to find counter arguments." You started with.....

Why do republicans hate the poor but love the rich?

...and then continued with a bunch of partisan hack bullshit intended to demonize, stereotype, and attack those with a different viewpoint. If you wanted to "start a discussion about Republican policies and their effect on the working class in an effort to find counter arguments" you would have started this thread by saying "I am interested in starting a discussion about Republican policies and their effect on the working class in an effort to find counter arguments" instead of the inflammatory bullshit you started with.

Your intention was to start shit and now you are acting all innocent and defensive because shit got started.