Why the right fights

[Staidhup]

When the size and scope of government eclipses the will and rights of the very people it was designed to represent its time to scale it back. The old and tired legislative system of scratch your back and I will scratch your back resulted in the growth of a unsustainable financial mess. Great legacy to pass on to your grand children and children.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That was a really good read. I think Douthat pretty much has it right.

The Teabaggers basically want to go back to the 1920, before modernity began to surpass their dumb asses.

I think they think that if we wound the clock backwards exactly 100 years, that they'll show us how the 20th century might have been had we not had SS, Medicare, basically the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and of course, no Obamacare.

Nevermind that SS and Medicare helped us wipe out poverty among seniors.

You read it, agree with him, and then insult yourself?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So what you’re seeing motivating the House Intransigents today, what’s driving their willingness to engage in probably-pointless brinksmanship, is not just anger at a specific Democratic administration, or opposition to a specific program, or disappointment over a single electoral defeat. Rather, it’s a revolt against the long term pattern I’ve just described: Against what these conservatives, and many on the right, see as forty years of failure, in which first Reagan and then Gingrich and now the Tea Party wave have all failed to deliver on the promise of an actual right-wing answer to the big left-wing victories of the 1930s and 1960s — and now, with Obamacare, of Obama’s first two years as well.

Conservatives are ‘fighting’ motivated by fear: fear of diversity, change, and expressions of individual liberty, the fear shared by all reactionaries as a society becomes more sophisticated, enlightened, and inclusive; they fear the common-sense pragmatism most Americans today advocate which rejects blind adherence to failed conservative political and fiscal dogma.

The willingness of House republicans, for example, to engage in pointless brinksmanship is the manifestation typical of the desperate reactionary coming to the realization that the change he unjustifiably and irrationally fears is inevitable.

And the motivation is also a consequence of conservative anger at a specific democratic administration, opposition to a specific program, and disappointment over a single electoral defeat – this is indeed very much partisan as well.

Conservatives want less government and more freedom, you want a government that protects you from making the wrong choice, and we are motivated by fear.

Good delusional logic.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's not foolish.
The Dems wanted a shutdown like this so they could blame for the GOP for the following disaster. Obama warned it would be a disaster to our financial system.
Guess what, the shutdown happened and no one noticed much. Of course Obama is trying to do all he can to make the situation as bad as he can. Because he doesnt give a shit about people. Harry Reid doesnt give a shit about children with cancer. But the public isn't buying the gloom and doom. In fact, they're probably OK with just having a government of "essential" services, just like the Founders intended.
With anything like this there is no predicting where it will end up. I suspect the Dems are getting their lunch eaten.

I love your delusions..so entertaining

Are you here to get another dose of whoop-ass? You should know better than to challenge someone with demonstrated superiority in debate and knowledge. Why don't you just claim I'm a racist and go away, like you always do?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We need to take Conservative principles and couple them with 21st century technology

We don't need Federal Departments to control corn production or set the price of milk, that's Old School DemoSoviet Thought.

Individual freedom couple with nearly unlimited access to information will put the consumer back in charge

The problem with putting the "consumer" in charge is that you mean only the consumer who can afford them.

They actually do have a country that follows the TeaBagger philosophy. It's called "Somalia".

Lots of guns. No government. No Social Safety Net. Lots of crazy religion.

Bush actually made the government of Somalia stronger because he didn't like the fact that people had freedom, so keep pointing to it as an example of a small and limited government, it amuses smart people.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The problem with putting the "consumer" in charge is that you mean only the consumer who can afford them.

They actually do have a country that follows the TeaBagger philosophy. It's called "Somalia".

Lots of guns. No government. No Social Safety Net. Lots of crazy religion.

Worried about your welfare check, eh?

No, worried that we'll have food riots when the "market" screws up the best food delivery system in the world.

Fact is, the biggest bunch of socialists out there is the agriculture industry.

How can the market screw up the market?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Damn good column in today's NYT. It should be required reading for all the self declared experts on people like me.

So what you’re seeing motivating the House Intransigents today, what’s driving their willingness to engage in probably-pointless brinksmanship, is not just anger at a specific Democratic administration, or opposition to a specific program, or disappointment over a single electoral defeat. Rather, it’s a revolt against the long term pattern I’ve just described: Against what these conservatives, and many on the right, see as forty years of failure, in which first Reagan and then Gingrich and now the Tea Party wave have all failed to deliver on the promise of an actual right-wing answer to the big left-wing victories of the 1930s and 1960s — and now, with Obamacare, of Obama’s first two years as well.
“They didn’t dare,” Frum wrote of the Intransigents’ Reagan-era predecessors, “and they realized that they didn’t dare.” Well, this time, no matter the risks and costs and polls, there are small-government conservatives who intend to dare — because only through a kind of wild daring, they believe, can the long-term, post-New Deal disadvantage that the cause of limited government labors under finally be overcome.
And if this attitude sounds more like a foolish romanticism than a prudent, responsible, grounded-in-reality conservatism — well, yes, unfortunately I think it pretty clearly is.

http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/why-the-right-fights/?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0

Fucking right it is foolish, but it is better than the alternative.

They believe that destroying representative democracy is the only way to save representative democracy.

Which representative Democracy are you talking about?

 

[Steven_R]

That was a really good read. I think Douthat pretty much has it right.

The Teabaggers basically want to go back to the 1920, before modernity began to surpass their dumb asses.

I think they think that if we wound the clock backwards exactly 100 years, that they'll show us how the 20th century might have been had we not had SS, Medicare, basically the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and of course, no Obamacare.

Nevermind that SS and Medicare helped us wipe out poverty among seniors.

The flip side of that coin is we've been doing it your way for a century and yet those problems you demand government fix still haven't gone away. Banking is still out of control, big business still does what it wants, poverty still exists, increasing number of people are poor, so on and so forth.

When does all that government intervention finally pay off?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The problem with putting the "consumer" in charge is that you mean only the consumer who can afford them.

They actually do have a country that follows the TeaBagger philosophy. It's called "Somalia".

Lots of guns. No government. No Social Safety Net. Lots of crazy religion.

Worried about your welfare check, eh?

No, worried that we'll have food riots when the "market" screws up the best food delivery system in the world.

Fact is, the biggest bunch of socialists out there is the agriculture industry.

We never had a national housing collapse until we first installed a national housing policy.

The S&L Crisis started 5 minutes after the Government formed Freddie Mac to buy mortgages from S&L's

Read a book besides your Little Red one

 

[Toro]

Worried about your welfare check, eh?

No, worried that we'll have food riots when the "market" screws up the best food delivery system in the world.

Fact is, the biggest bunch of socialists out there is the agriculture industry.

We never had a national housing collapse until we first installed a national housing policy.

The S&L Crisis started 5 minutes after the Government formed Freddie Mac to buy mortgages from S&L's

Read a book besides your Little Red one

Home prices collapsed in the 1930s before there were GSEs.

 

[Plasmaball]

It's not foolish.
The Dems wanted a shutdown like this so they could blame for the GOP for the following disaster. Obama warned it would be a disaster to our financial system.
Guess what, the shutdown happened and no one noticed much. Of course Obama is trying to do all he can to make the situation as bad as he can. Because he doesnt give a shit about people. Harry Reid doesnt give a shit about children with cancer. But the public isn't buying the gloom and doom. In fact, they're probably OK with just having a government of "essential" services, just like the Founders intended.
With anything like this there is no predicting where it will end up. I suspect the Dems are getting their lunch eaten.

I love your delusions..so entertaining

Are you here to get another dose of whoop-ass? You should know better than to challenge someone with demonstrated superiority in debate and knowledge. Why don't you just claim I'm a racist and go away, like you always do?

Hahahahahaha....good stuff....good stuff

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No, worried that we'll have food riots when the "market" screws up the best food delivery system in the world.

Fact is, the biggest bunch of socialists out there is the agriculture industry.

We never had a national housing collapse until we first installed a national housing policy.

The S&L Crisis started 5 minutes after the Government formed Freddie Mac to buy mortgages from S&L's

Read a book besides your Little Red one

Home prices collapsed in the 1930s before there were GSEs.

Right. Thanks to the Fed.

National organization = national collapse

 

[LoneLaugher]

I love your delusions..so entertaining

Are you here to get another dose of whoop-ass? You should know better than to challenge someone with demonstrated superiority in debate and knowledge. Why don't you just claim I'm a racist and go away, like you always do?

Hahahahahaha....good stuff....good stuff

The sun rises.
Leaves grow on trees.
Rabbi has superior debate skills and knowledge.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are you here to get another dose of whoop-ass? You should know better than to challenge someone with demonstrated superiority in debate and knowledge. Why don't you just claim I'm a racist and go away, like you always do?

Hahahahahaha....good stuff....good stuff

The sun rises.
Leaves grow on trees.
Rabbi has superior debate skills and knowledge.

He debates people like you all the time, how do you expect him to get better if he keeps playing with Head Start students?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Hahahahahaha....good stuff....good stuff

The sun rises.
Leaves grow on trees.
Rabbi has superior debate skills and knowledge.

He debates people like you all the time, how do you expect him to get better if he keeps playing with Head Start students?

Oh....I know. He's like really, really smart. A challenge for anyone. You two make a great pair. Between you, you'd have a Perry/Palin combo in the Oval Office. Talk about brilliant!

Have you realized that the article that you praised in the OP as describing you perfectly.....called you a fool?

 

[DaGoose]

So what you’re seeing motivating the House Intransigents today, what’s driving their willingness to engage in probably-pointless brinksmanship, is not just anger at a specific Democratic administration, or opposition to a specific program, or disappointment over a single electoral defeat. Rather, it’s a revolt against the long term pattern I’ve just described: Against what these conservatives, and many on the right, see as forty years of failure, in which first Reagan and then Gingrich and now the Tea Party wave have all failed to deliver on the promise of an actual right-wing answer to the big left-wing victories of the 1930s and 1960s — and now, with Obamacare, of Obama’s first two years as well.

Conservatives are ‘fighting’ motivated by fear: fear of diversity, change, and expressions of individual liberty, the fear shared by all reactionaries as a society becomes more sophisticated, enlightened, and inclusive; they fear the common-sense pragmatism most Americans today advocate which rejects blind adherence to failed conservative political and fiscal dogma.

The willingness of House republicans, for example, to engage in pointless brinksmanship is the manifestation typical of the desperate reactionary coming to the realization that the change he unjustifiably and irrationally fears is inevitable.

And the motivation is also a consequence of conservative anger at a specific democratic administration, opposition to a specific program, and disappointment over a single electoral defeat – this is indeed very much partisan as well.

Conservatives want less government and more freedom, you want a government that protects you from making the wrong choice, and we are motivated by fear.

Good delusional logic.

Speaking of delusional.....

You say you want less government and more freedom but that is laughable. First of all you you are NOT "conservatives". You are classic "Neo-Conservatives".

You preach smaller government and more freedom but then turn around and say you want government to tell women and their doctors what to do with their bodies, tell two people they cannot marry, tell doctors how they treat patients who are brain dead, tell people they cannot use marijuana to treat cancer symptoms and tell people they cannot die with dignity.

Face it. You're a liar. You REALLY don't want less government. You want a government that tells people how to live their private lives.

Shame on you.

.

 

[JoeB131]

We need to take Conservative principles and couple them with 21st century technology

We don't need Federal Departments to control corn production or set the price of milk, that's Old School DemoSoviet Thought.

Individual freedom couple with nearly unlimited access to information will put the consumer back in charge

The problem with putting the "consumer" in charge is that you mean only the consumer who can afford them.

Yes. We want consumers to have what they can't afford! That's the socialist way!

If the market controlled agriculture, farms would lie fallow when they couldn't sell their crops. this is EXACTLY what occurred during the Great Depression, where dairy farmers dumped hundreds of gallons of milk because no one had the money to buy it.

In fact, if as much as you guys whine about "Socialism", agriculture is pretty much entirely socialist in this country, and it works.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The problem with putting the "consumer" in charge is that you mean only the consumer who can afford them.

Yes. We want consumers to have what they can't afford! That's the socialist way!

If the market controlled agriculture, farms would lie fallow when they couldn't sell their crops. this is EXACTLY what occurred during the Great Depression, where dairy farmers dumped hundreds of gallons of milk because no one had the money to buy it.

In fact, if as much as you guys whine about "Socialism", agriculture is pretty much entirely socialist in this country, and it works.

You know the FDR Depression ended 70 years ago.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes. We want consumers to have what they can't afford! That's the socialist way!

If the market controlled agriculture, farms would lie fallow when they couldn't sell their crops. this is EXACTLY what occurred during the Great Depression, where dairy farmers dumped hundreds of gallons of milk because no one had the money to buy it.

In fact, if as much as you guys whine about "Socialism", agriculture is pretty much entirely socialist in this country, and it works.

You know the FDR Depression ended 70 years ago.

Yes, I do. And I know we haven't had another one like it (although 2008 was close) because we kept his reforms in place.

It's kind of like saying, "People kept stealing my shit until I started locking my door!"

Locking your door is still a good idea even if no one has stolen your shit in a while.

And you see, guy, Republicans USED to get this. Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, all realized FDR was right about the role of government and kept the government doing the things it needed to do.

Until the Teabaggers and LiberTards took over, anyway.

 

[Eaglewings]

We need to take Conservative principles and couple them with 21st century technology

We don't need Federal Departments to control corn production or set the price of milk, that's Old School DemoSoviet Thought.

Individual freedom couple with nearly unlimited access to information will put the consumer back in charge

Or go back a million years and drag their women around by the hair..........