URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID6
Thread Number: 38010
[ Go back to previous page ]

Original Message
"Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."

Posted by Estee on 02-26-13 at 12:10 PM
Please consult the following article and familiarize yourselves with the full list of traitors whom you are no longer permitted to vote for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/us/politics/prominent-republicans-sign-brief-in-support-of-gay-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

That fracture just keeps getting deeper, doesn't it?

I do believe a number of them just gave up their careers via signature.

*salute*


Table of contents

Messages in this discussion
"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by kingfish on 02-26-13 at 02:04 PM
I think it's great that on social issues Republicans are moving to the middle. It seems obvious to me that there would have been more movement, and sooner, if they had felt that that's what the people that they represent wanted.

Now, if we can only get Democrats to move to the middle on fiscal issues.

And Obama, if we could just get him to move. Period.


"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by jbug on 02-26-13 at 03:31 PM
I <3 you Guppie.

"You Can't Go Home Again."
Posted by foonermints on 02-27-13 at 01:48 AM
» if we could just get him to move. Period. «

But.. but..


Handcrafted by RollDdice
The Kenyans can't support another King. That front is a no-go.


"RE: You Can't Go Home Again."
Posted by cahaya on 02-27-13 at 05:37 PM
The Kenyans can't support another King. That front is a no-go.

Definitely a no-go for Michelle, allowing Barack to marry another three wives.


"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by KeithFan on 02-27-13 at 04:28 PM
When he moves, bad things happen.


Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. -Ronald Reagan


"???"
Posted by Estee on 02-27-13 at 05:07 PM

"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by cahaya on 02-27-13 at 10:31 PM
... to the middle...

To the middle of what?

Current politics is squared upon fiscal issues (and, to note, the sequestration coming up on Friday) and social issues (sex and babies).

Seriously. It's like there's a battle of what it means to "get the house in order".

Bama's hands are tied by Congress, although he has much influence in how sequestration cuts are allocated, much of which is obviously going to escape his attention in its bureaucratic details (read: recent articles on ICE releases and air traffic control and furlough layoffs). No joke, yet Congressional parties seem to be so entrenched in their positions, we're still at a WWI style trench warfare stalemate.


Foo dogs by tribe


"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by kingfish on 02-28-13 at 10:16 AM
"To the middle of what?"

I was referring to the political spectrum. Historically, Republicans are to the right and the Democrats are to the left in the political spectrum.

This seems to apply to both fiscal thinking and sex and baby matters, although the subject of the initial post gives one some hope that at least on social issues more (75? That is encouraging) Republicans may be moving to the middle. That's (as I said in the previous post) good news for me.

I agree with your statement about current politics. But Obama's hands are not tied. Far from it. As president he has a huge amount of influence. Witness his current tour of America to whip up support and bash/blame Republicans.

Besides the bully pulpit he has recourse with executive orders (and if you think he can't single handedly, without congressional consultation, affect fiscal issues, think back to his cancelling of Constellation).

Reid seems to be getting his orders from the White House, so there's that influence too. Being able to essentially direct the Senate on the large issues is no small thing.

And there are other actions that he can take. One that he really should consider, and one that the leadership in the House is on record saying they would agree to, is to agree to allow flexibility in the cuts. A simple thing like that that doesn't give away anything in regard to revenues or spending cuts (so it can be a face saving agreement). Admittedly, it also wouldn't resolve the D/R gridlock, but at least it would avoid having to use the blunt edge of the sequester knife, and allow cuts to be made intelligently.

It seems that in the immediate fiscal debate that the Democrat's idea of compromise is that Republicans should do the compromising. I hate that there might be a sequester, and I am whole heartedly against letting it happen, whatever the cost. Cede the battle and concentrate on the war.

But I have some sympathy for those who feel that the compromise made by the Republicans in the last go around should be reciprocated, at least in some small degree, by the Democrats this time. Compromise should mean that both parties give up something, and that the final agreement is one that both satisfies and dissatisfies both to some extent.


"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by cahaya on 02-28-13 at 05:35 PM
Yes, I know you meant to the middle of political spectrum, with the Pubs in the right corner and the Dems in the left corner. But there also is a divide between fiscal issues and social issues that serves as a boxing-ring, with corners on each.

And historically, the political center on both fiscal issues and social issues has constantly been on the move, and it is even now. Mention same-gender marriage even as early as a decade or two ago and it would have been placed on the far left of social positions. And it's this movement of what the center represents is what is fracturing (using Estee's word) the Pubs, as though the Pubs are a fusion of two very different factions with different positions on social issues although they generally agree on fiscal issues.

There is only so much the President can do in terms of wielding his influence with the upcoming budget sequestration, and it's not so much the power to do it, but the massive minutae of it that has to be left in the hands of those who deal with their departments every day. The President can make broader policy decisions, but he can't decide every detail of it for the whole of the U.S. government bureaucracy. He can only decide what's important to the administration and leave the rest to those already in the know, whether they are competent in managing it or not.

There is some solace in that the Congress passed legislation to protect women against violence, in particular domestic violence, but even that had its political course to run, with one draft rejected and another eventually to be accepted by both Houses. Unfortunately, the political environment is such that "if you are not with us, you are with them", a confrontational attitude that does not lend itself to compromise.

And it's about more than compromise, give and take, it's about what is in the best interests of this nation of American people, diverse as we are, with those elected to office serving the people. It seems many elected officials, on both sides of the wide aisle, have forgotten this.


"He's looking more Republican every day:"
Posted by kidflash212 on 03-01-13 at 04:17 PM

"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by dabo on 02-27-13 at 03:44 AM
Liberal as I am, I have never considered myself anti-Republican. Quite frankly, I always favored the genuine republic political philosophy, but we lost the live and let live Republican party of old some ways back in favor special interests and big money.

Nice to see, finally, some of these robots breaking ranks.


"Trying to kill my congressman are they?."
Posted by Snidget on 02-27-13 at 01:22 PM
This comes out and he faints..

http://www.thetimesnews.com/news/top-news/rep-coble-hospitalized-after-feeling-faint-1.102414

Coinkydink, I think not, sir.


"RE: Trying to kill my congressman are they?."
Posted by Estee on 02-27-13 at 02:44 PM
It's hard to see North Carolina's GOP faction as taking this well, isn't it? Don't worry -- their state constitution will ensure they remain the last bastion of bigotry for as long as only-we-are-humanly possible. Just tell him that and he'll be on his feet and banning interracial adoption by Friday.

After all, his health is what's important.


"RE: Trying to kill my congressman are they?."
Posted by Snidget on 02-27-13 at 06:39 PM
Now,now, not last, pentultimate or antepenultimate or preantepenultimate and on a good week propreantepenultimate.

There is always South Carolina or Mississippi bringing up the rear.


"RE: Seventy-five soon to be unemployed Republicans."
Posted by cahaya on 02-27-13 at 05:40 PM
That fracture just keeps getting deeper, doesn't it?

Just a fracture?

More like a bridge over the abyss that drops into the fires of Hell.

As-Sirāt.


"Make His Day..."
Posted by kidflash212 on 02-28-13 at 01:38 PM
Clint Eastwood signs on as well.


Capn2patch put me in motion!


"RE: Make His Day..."
Posted by Estee on 02-28-13 at 04:55 PM
Realistically, he wasn't going to be invited to speak at the next convention anyway...

On a similar note, CPAC declined to give Chris Christie a podium after his daring to ask and thank for help.


"I don't hink it will be noticable"
Posted by bondt007 on 03-01-13 at 02:22 PM

...as we are following Obama and the Dems into the great abyss anyway.

But, head in sand and all that. Life is dandy.



>Issued by "Q" and RollDdice


"RE: I don't hink it will be noticable"
Posted by Estee on 03-01-13 at 02:27 PM
The point is that you shouldn't worry. There are at least seventy-five more extreme right-wingers waiting in line to replace them. For every person who moves closer to the center, a thousand more grab swords and cut through every uniting tie. And that's the way to save the country as you know it.

*shrug*

Must be, right? It's the only tactic left.