The "RINO" Thread

[Gadawg73]

If you are a business owner then... Well... Lets just say I think you are lying.

Edit: OH... You are damn near 60... I guess it is believable if unlikely.

I own 3 corporations.

That can't be right. I don't think anyone can run a successful business with the inability to say... I agree with someone I don't like.

You know, for the 90% of us who aren't business owners, and don't think they walk on water.

And this is where the GOP is in a trick bag. They can't win with these people and they can't win without them. That's the crux of everything Joe just said.

And you agree with that. Unless... You are talking to him and then ... Well shit, lets make something up that he didn't say because you ... I don't know... Want to be partisan?

Where did I say I agreed with that?

 

[Gadawg73]

I was a huge fan of Rick Perry and hope he throws his hat in the ring for the 2016 election.

Slick Rick needs to be prepared next time.
He would have done no better than Romney.
I have no problems with him on most issues but can HE compromise?

He wrote that he thought SS was unconstitutional. That's what I think of being appealing to the very hard right but totally losing the middle.

Perry is a loose cannon.
Looks and acts like Tarzan, plays like Jane.

 

[Old Rocks]

Jon Huntsmen. A very successful governor as well. If the GOP were to come back to sanity, an excellent choice in 2016. Not a chance of that, considering what I am seeing with these people.

Huntsman is a tax and spend RINO. It's no surprise that liberals like him. However, most Republicans aren't interested in promoting the liberal agenda.

As governor Huntsman promoted programs intended to reduce carbon emissions, including the Western Climate Initiative, which included six states and three Canadian provinces, had a cap-a-trade provision and encouraged fuel-efficient vehicles, renewable energy use and energy conservation. He also appeared in an advertisement sponsored by Environmental Defense, where he said, “Now it’s time for Congress to act by capping greenhouse-gas pollution.”

Huntsman as Governor backed bills providing civil rights protections to gays and lesbians, and threatened to veto a measure repealing in-state college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants.

In 2007, when asked about a healthcare mandate, Huntsman said, “I’m comfortable with a requirement – you can call it whatever you want, but at some point we’re going to have to get serious about how we deal with this issue”.

Huntsman is a RINO.

End of story.

And what you said is exact confirmation of why the GOP will lose in 2014 and 2016. Apparently it will take that in order to either get the people like Toro to take back control of the party, or form another viable party. For the GOP is rapidly becoming unviable, thanks to people like you.

 

[Old Rocks]

Slick Rick needs to be prepared next time.
He would have done no better than Romney.
I have no problems with him on most issues but can HE compromise?

He wrote that he thought SS was unconstitutional. That's what I think of being appealing to the very hard right but totally losing the middle.

Perry is a loose cannon.
Looks and acts like Tarzan, plays like Jane.

"Smells like ___________". Just as well finish the quote

 

[JakeStarkey]

Huckabee or Thompson would have stood a better chance 08 (McCain would have won if the economy had not collapsed) and Coburn may have won in 2012.

You invent excuses for the far right's role in the demise of the GOP. Americans generally despise Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and while like Ron Paul, they won't vote for any libertarian for president.

You guys simply don't county anymore.

Pulled the hate card? Libertarians?

You're off your fucking rocker. McCain lost because the Democrats had an overwhelmingly superior ground game. Romney lost because he didn't get the disaffected conservatives to vote for him and the GOP didn't do ANYTHING to attract new voters.

And you painting me as the "far right" is indicative of how tone deaf the GOP establishment is. It's all abstract to your type. I'm nowhere near the "far right" in voting nor in political pragmatism. I just didn't think McCain and Romney were worth the grief becoming an election day activist. Neither had anything but status quote milquetoast proposals.

But go ahead and invent your own narrative. We lost, but you're still manning your post on a sinking ship. I've decided to swim on my own - and that's worked out quite well for me so far.

Name one person on the right you think could have won either in 2008 or 2012.

 

[Missourian]

I was a huge fan of Rick Perry and hope he throws his hat in the ring for the 2016 election.

Slick Rick needs to be prepared next time.
He would have done no better than Romney.
I have no problems with him on most issues but can HE compromise?

He wrote that he thought SS was unconstitutional. That's what I think of being appealing to the very hard right but totally losing the middle.

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that at all.

What I believe he wrote was to the effect that the 1930s Supreme Court abdicated it's responsibility by abandoning it's limited government precedents when they upheld the New Deal as Constitutional.

 

[Gadawg73]

Fiscal conservatives CUT SPENDING when spending is out of control.
What has the White House offered?
Nothing. Get back to me when your team offers one cent in spending cuts.
GOP never has spent more than the Democrats. Why the fiction?

Not a fiction. Bush and the GOP Congress spent more than any previous Administration. The self-avowed "conservatives" of the Bush era spent like drunken sailors on crack. They did not cut spending. They doubled the national debt.

That is one of the main reasons I stopped voting in 2006.

You are hallucinating.


.

You can not add.
All 4 years of Obama we have spent more than any year under Bush.
2002: 2 trillion
2003 2.1 trillion
2004 2.2 trillion
2005 2.5 trillion
2006 2.6 trillion
2007 2.7 trillion
2008 2.9 trillion
your boy Obama
2009: 3.5 trillion
2010: 3.6 trillion
2011: 3.8 trillion
2012: 3.8 trillion
2013: 3.9 trillion



1 plus 4 does equal 8 to most Democrats but it doesn't.

 

[elvis]

Interestingly enough, libertarians are closer to that than anyone else.

If the GOP opened its platform up to libertarian principles they could win elections.

People are tired of the authoritarianism and the fiscal recklessness. That's where libertarianism comes into play.

I'm also tired of all the conservative social issues. I'm tired of the drug war, I'm tired of hearing about abortion. I'm tired of attempts to legislation morality. I'm tired of the creationist idiocies of the Christian fundamentalists.

Then you had better address them in the Republican Party. Otherwise, we liberals are going to seriously kick some butt in 2014.

Just like you did in 2010, as you predicted. Oh wait.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Will somebody post what Br'er Rick actually said or wrote. I think he said it was a ponzi scheme, and if he had said it in our East Texas town in public, he would have been called out by the senior citizens.

Rick is an anti-science and anti-evolution freak: that is the only way he holds together the 37 to 39% of the electorate he needs as a based to build on.

Loved my decades in Texas but am glad I am retired in Utah with a family condo in Park City and a private condo in the city. I am not LDS but I sure like that most of them are very pro-evolution and pro-science. The ultra right here is primarily economics oriented.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The TPM was underestimated by many right, center, and left in 2010, but not now. It is fading in many parts of the country. If the GOP keeps up this way, the dems will take the House in 2014.

I'm also tired of all the conservative social issues. I'm tired of the drug war, I'm tired of hearing about abortion. I'm tired of attempts to legislation morality. I'm tired of the creationist idiocies of the Christian fundamentalists.

Then you had better address them in the Republican Party. Otherwise, we liberals are going to seriously kick some butt in 2014.

Just like you did in 2010, as you predicted. Oh wait.

 

[Toro]

Slick Rick needs to be prepared next time.
He would have done no better than Romney.
I have no problems with him on most issues but can HE compromise?

He wrote that he thought SS was unconstitutional. That's what I think of being appealing to the very hard right but totally losing the middle.

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that at all.

What I believe he wrote was to the effect that the 1930s Supreme Court abdicated it's responsibility by abandoning it's limited government precedents when they upheld the New Deal as Constitutional.

He said in an interview that the Founding Fathers didn't mean a public pension plan when they included the general welfare clause, and he attacked the Supreme Court for its acceptance of the New Deal. It's in a Daily Beast article. He also argued against the 17th amendment. These are issues that appeal to the hard right but scare everyone else.

 

[Missourian]

He wrote that he thought SS was unconstitutional. That's what I think of being appealing to the very hard right but totally losing the middle.

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that at all.

What I believe he wrote was to the effect that the 1930s Supreme Court abdicated it's responsibility by abandoning it's limited government precedents when they upheld the New Deal as Constitutional.

He said in an interview that the Founding Fathers didn't mean a public pension plan when they included the general welfare clause, and he attacked the Supreme Court for its acceptance of the New Deal. It's in a Daily Beast article. He also argued against the 17th amendment. These are issues that appeal to the hard right but scare everyone else.

I suppose it makes no difference that he is correct.

That is the same argument made against Obamacare.

And the 17th Amendment did weaken the federalist system.

 

[Toro]

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that at all.

What I believe he wrote was to the effect that the 1930s Supreme Court abdicated it's responsibility by abandoning it's limited government precedents when they upheld the New Deal as Constitutional.

He said in an interview that the Founding Fathers didn't mean a public pension plan when they included the general welfare clause, and he attacked the Supreme Court for its acceptance of the New Deal. It's in a Daily Beast article. He also argued against the 17th amendment. These are issues that appeal to the hard right but scare everyone else.

I suppose it makes no difference that he is correct.

That is the same argument made against Obamacare.

And the 17th Amendment did weaken the federalist system.

What matters politically is what people perceive. They perceive SS as being constitutional and voting an integral part of being American. Arguing otherwise puts one on the fringes of the political spectrum.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Americans overwhelmingly believe SS is constitutional, and if 5% are saying they disagree, that minority is looked on with disdain, suspicion, and some fear.

 

[Gadawg73]

Americans overwhelmingly believe SS is constitutional, and if 5% are saying they disagree, that minority is looked on with disdain, suspicion, and some fear.

The Constitution does not bar government sponsored Ponzi schemes.

 

[g5000]

Fiscal conservatives CUT SPENDING when spending is out of control.
What has the White House offered?
Nothing. Get back to me when your team offers one cent in spending cuts.
GOP never has spent more than the Democrats. Why the fiction?

Not a fiction. Bush and the GOP Congress spent more than any previous Administration. The self-avowed "conservatives" of the Bush era spent like drunken sailors on crack. They did not cut spending. They doubled the national debt.

That is one of the main reasons I stopped voting in 2006.

You are hallucinating.


.

You can not add.
All 4 years of Obama we have spent more than any year under Bush.
2002: 2 trillion
2003 2.1 trillion
2004 2.2 trillion
2005 2.5 trillion
2006 2.6 trillion
2007 2.7 trillion
2008 2.9 trillion
your boy Obama
2009: 3.5 trillion
2010: 3.6 trillion
2011: 3.8 trillion
2012: 3.8 trillion
2013: 3.9 trillion



1 plus 4 does equal 8 to most Democrats but it doesn't.

You have your chronology backwards.

Obama was not President before Bush. Bush outspent all Democrats and Republicans before him. So to say the "GOP never has spent more than the Democrats" is a falsehood.

Stop being an apologist for the profligacy of the "borrow and spend" party.



.

 

[JoeB131]

And there are Democrats out there that ONLY vote Democrat because of social issues.
So what else is new?
Life is like football. You have to tackle your problems, block your fears and score your points when you get the opportunity.
We are now with our backs to the end zone in this country. It is 1st and goal against us at the one.
What do we do? Lay down like we have and allow the tax and spend fools that can not balance a check book just walk on in, raise taxes again and then proceed to raise spending the same amount as we always have because of fear?
NO, we stand up and fight them off, cut the massive waste in the budget and take possession of the ball after their 4 tries at fucking us once again.

Wow, you must be flailing, you're doubling down on the sports analogies...

The thing is, when the Democrat says he wants to protect a woman's right to choose, he actually acheives results.

I don't care if the 1% lays down or not. The fact is, you've only gotten over on the working class because you've tricked so much of it into voting against its own interests. Now the old tricks aren't working and you are looking for some new tricks. Except people ain't buying.

You want to get people against taxes, actually get them to pay taxes. When you've so denuded the working class of wages that the fiscal cliff is a yawn to them... your problems only matter to you.

I don't care if you pay higher taxes.. I don't care if you get more regulations. These things don't bother me.

And honestly, if you don't care about my problems, I sure as fuck ain't going to care about yours.

When you run on an "every man for himself" idealogy,you really need to think that kind of thing through.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe hates business owners as we do not work in his eyes.

If you are a business owner then... Well... Lets just say I think you are lying.

Edit: OH... You are damn near 60... I guess it is believable if unlikely.

I own 3 corporations.

And you drive a Lambourghini and you're hung like Ron Jeremy. GOt it.

 

[JoeB131]

This is one of the places we really blew it.

When we had control of the white house and the congress we didn't stick to the principles that we campaigned on for years...fiscal responsibility.

Sure, taxes were cut...but instead of making an attempt to cut spending, we spent just like Democrats.

The argument has been successfully made that cut and spend is WORSE than tax and spend.

Is it any wonder nobody trusts us to cut spending?

Of course it's worse.

Because when you don't tax, people look at all the goodies they get for nothing and they totally want more of that shit. Who wouldn't?

This is the problem the GOP has. The people in charge, the Mitt Romneys of the world, looked at people who were self-sufficient and taking care of themselves at places like AmPad and GS Steel and KB Toys and they said, "SCrew that shit. You aren't profitable enough! We need to bust that union, move that factory to China, get rid of those health benefits."

And then those people refused to obdiently take a lower standard of living than their parents had. They went to the government to maintain it.

 

[Dot Com]

He said in an interview that the Founding Fathers didn't mean a public pension plan when they included the general welfare clause, and he attacked the Supreme Court for its acceptance of the New Deal. It's in a Daily Beast article. He also argued against the 17th amendment. These are issues that appeal to the hard right but scare everyone else.

I suppose it makes no difference that he is correct.

That is the same argument made against Obamacare.

And the 17th Amendment did weaken the federalist system.

What matters politically is what people perceive. They perceive SS as being constitutional and voting an integral part of being American. Arguing otherwise puts one on the fringes of the political spectrum.

I don't think most Americans much care/deliberate the Constitutionality of it, they like it (when its not raided by politicians ).