Why Does It Seem Republicans and Their Supporters Are Destroying America

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think people are looking at the 2 party system the wrong way now.

The battle in this country isn't R vs D, or liberal v conservative.

It is the marriage of very big business, military and big government vs small business owners, ordinary workers, and immigrants.

R's and D's no longer operate between the 40 yard lines, they are both operating between the 49 yard line, and it is a destructive path.

We saw it for 8 years with GW Bush and we have seen President Obama double down on the worst of Bush policies with his spending and quite honestly one of the worst and most arrogant economic teams ever put together.

Congress simply doesn't have a clue. You have mostly economically brain dead Congressman who have their bills and opinions written by big business lobbyists, which is how we end up with stupid 1099 rules in the health care law.

Don't let the political/big business class fool you, its not Rs vs Ds anymore, its those with influence and power vs everyone else

I would agree with that except for the fact that we are fighting between the 49s. It seems to be that during the 90s, the Ds conceded on nearly every "conservative" economic theory and we are now just fighting over the details. We've reached a point where we are arguing over whether the richest of the rich should pay 39 percent or 35 percent. And those who dare to raise the rate to 39 percent are socialists.

Under Ike, the highest take rate was 91 percent. Under Nixon, it was 70 percent. Under Reagan, 50 percent.

If the Dems had any balls, they would propose that "We Return to the Reagan Years" and go back to that 50 percent rate.

This is what the Dems have conceded over the last 30 years on the budget:

1. It is impossible to have the highest tax rates go above, say, 36 percent. That seems to be the line in the sand. Above that, you are a socialist.

2. It is impossible to cut the military budget. Do so and you are a "surrender monkey."

All the Dems have left is a rearguard action to protect social programs that date back either to the mid 60s or mid 30s.

[Burgold]

When are the "Sucka's" going to wake up and realize both parties suck. Neither party can fix this mess afterall both are responsible for it.

They're suckers! You expect a sucker to figure something out. If they could figure stuff out they wound't be suckers. They would be licorice or nougat or something else.

[NavyDave]

Watching from the outside it seems state after state the Republicans are just destroying American values and freedoms, stripping GOVERNMENT workers of the right to collectively bargain.

Because to most left wingers, socialist, progressives and others used to government handouts they foolishly believe government workers have constitutional right to make more than those that actually work for those who create something.

It seems like the laws and regulations are written more and more to sell out the middle class to the richest few.

Socialism works until other peoples wallets become empty.

How much longer before America becomes the England the first settlers had to flee? America won't become the England because we won't allow sniveling liberals to continue to screw up my country with progressive nonsense or political correctness.

[PokerPacker]

Its not Republicans that are ruining America, its politicians. Democrats and Republicans both collectively suck. But I guess Democrats support more socialistic policies like Canada, so I guess it must be the Republicans alone who are destroying America against the will of the patriotic Democrats.

[Stadium-Armory]

Because to most left wingers, socialist, progressives and others used to government handouts they foolishly believe government workers have constitutional right to make more than.. America won't become the England because we won't allow sniveling liberals to continue to screw up my country with progressive nonsense or political correctness.

Geroge Washington was a progressive. If it weren't for the liberal ideals of the founding fathers, you would be English. In fact, if it were 1776, you would be a loyalist.

[TimmySmith]

Geroge Washington was a progressive. If it weren't for the liberal ideals of the founding fathers, you would be English. In fact, if it were 1776, you would be a loyalist.

You mean terrorist. Oops, my bad, we won.

[deejaydana]

both parties have spent us into oblivion. The Dems just do it faster and with less shame.

[DjTj]

I think people are looking at the 2 party system the wrong way now.

The battle in this country isn't R vs D, or liberal v conservative.

It is the marriage of very big business, military and big government vs small business owners, ordinary workers, and immigrants.

R's and D's no longer operate between the 40 yard lines, they are both operating between the 49 yard line, and it is a destructive path.

We saw it for 8 years with GW Bush and we have seen President Obama double down on the worst of Bush policies with his spending and quite honestly one of the worst and most arrogant economic teams ever put together.

Congress simply doesn't have a clue. You have mostly economically brain dead Congressman who have their bills and opinions written by big business lobbyists, which is how we end up with stupid 1099 rules in the health care law.

Don't let the political/big business class fool you, its not Rs vs Ds anymore, its those with influence and power vs everyone else

Don't fool yourself. It is Republicans vs. Democrats. Those without power and influence are not part of the conversation.

It's like the NFL labor situation. That battle is entirely between the owners and the players. The fans like to think that they have a voice, or that their opinions are being considered, but they're not. There are only two parties at the table, and they will do what is best for them.

If you don't have a voice, if you aren't organized, if you don't buy yourself a seat at the table or fight for the microphone, then you can't even claim to be "us" in an "us vs. them." It is "them vs. them." The rest of us aren't even in the game.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Geroge Washington was a progressive. If it weren't for the liberal ideals of the founding fathers, you would be English. In fact, if it were 1776, you would be a loyalist.

I think NavyDave would have been a slave in 1776 actually. Unless I am utterly confused.

[twa]

Washington woulddespise what call themselves progressives today

[Stadium-Armory]

Washington woulddespise what call themselves progressives today

Debatable, but probably so.

But in the context of their time, they supported "liberal" ideals like liberty and equal rights. I think its inconsistent to say "I hate liberalism", but then beat your chest about how great America is. It would be consistent to say: "I don't believe in equal rights, and that is why I don't support gay marriage", but what I normally here is something less consistent.

In conclusion, I think its fair to say "I don't like the policies of the democrats, they suck", but to say "liberals suck" and in the same breath talk about how much you like liberty and justice, is to misunderstand what the word means.

[The Sisko]

Well it only seems that way because liberals who gain their money and power by using the government/tax payers as a gravy train are threatened. These liberals who have friends in the media spin the news like you hear.

I personally wouldn't mind if all the terrorists and lazy union hacks would go to Canada to live and become citizens. I think that would really help our country out.

Please do yourself a favor. First, come back to reality. Both sides of the aisle dole out the $$$ to their constituents. Liberals often do it via Federal programs ostensibly designed to alleviate poverty, but both sides dole out a lot to private contractors as well. Of course I don't imagine you'd consider corporate welfare bad in the way that individual welfare is bad.

Second, stop with the tired "America love it or leave it" nonsense. I think the founding fathers realized the concept of the wisdom of crowds. So no matter which side of the aisle you're on, your opposition serves a valuable purpose in the overall scheme of things, i.e. a yin-yang relationship. If pure conservatism were perfect, the founding fathers would have cut to the chase and simply structured our government in such a way that conservativism would be the only game in town.

[Thiebear]

Canada has the ability to relax and just let others do the heavy lifting.

location, location, location.

Dems were in charge for 40 years before 1994?

Dems were in charge from 2006-now?

Dem President Obama is doing a fine job and so is the Dem Senate.

Republican in the House have been in power for 2 months and have passed? Nothing?

Are you referring to a WI Governor trying to get the Unions to do for example Virginia's rules? A state that is not under enormous debt?

And i must say VA is a dem-repub state for the last decade that is purple and I like how they operate.

[The Sisko]

I think NavyDave would have been a slave in 1776 actually. Unless I am utterly confused.

Damn! Beat me to it. :mad:

[The 12th Commandment]

both parties have spent us into oblivion. The Dems just do it faster and with less shame.

Tax and spend vs. borrow and spend. I like the first better.

[Special K]

LOL, what a cluster**** of a thread. I never would have predicted that

[JMS]

Washington woulddespise what call themselves progressives today

Washington was a revolutionary which is among the most extreme positions on the Left. So I would argue you are entirely talking out of your bottocks when prescribing to any of the founding fathers a posiiton based upon ideology.

On the wider original point of why Republicans are destroying the country it's quite simple. Just as the Left rejuvenated and saved the country in 1932 with FDR from out of touch and flawed ideology exercised by Hoover. I would argue that Ronald Reagan performed a similar exercise in reverse when he took over in 1980. I would argue conservatives and liberals essentially approach every problem from a different perspective. Conservatives looking to fall back, or return to solutions which worked before... the safe choice. Liberals synonymous with Progressive tend to look for the new and potentially optimal solution, which is also inherently more risky than staying with a solution that is a known commodity...

Now why the republicans seem to be destroying the country? Simple, because a healthy country really needs both positions. There is no social progress without liberals(new solutions), and it is impossible to have a functioning government without being able to counterbalance liberals when we over reach by returning to the known solution. Their is a time for new change as FDR demonstrated, and a time for returning to what has worked before as Reagan has demonstrated. Today after decades of nearly continuous and at times dominant conservative control of our government the country frankly faces problems where it has no workable tried and true solution. (Health care, Social Security, Military security, Energy policy, and infrastructure rebuilding ). Thus conservatives tend to punt the issues and kick them down the road; and the Democrats who really aren't that liberal either are more likely to follow suit than to innovate.

I would argue this nation hasn't had a liberal leader since LBJ. Carter was a fiscal conservative evanjelical southern democrate... Bill Clinton was a moderate who put his fingers to the wind on most issues....

Obama far from a liberal is a pragmatist who is upsetting those on the left as much as those on the right. Much as Bill Clinton did before him.

Net result is perception that we fall backwards as important issues stagnate and important gains are rolled backwards, the nation treads water, and new problems mount.

That is just the American political cycle. When enough Americans believe we need new solutions to some of these problems we've faced now for going on 40 years, they will turn to liberals; and when they get tired of new solutions they will turn back to the conservatives.

I think the reason this diacotomy is so pronounced today is because of how devisive the political system has become, demonizing the oposition and failing to compromise on important issues.

[Mickalino]

Except he's not.. he's sitting in a free country that runs quite smoothly.

I've never thought that it's wise to ignore the words of your neighbors.

They see your house from an entirely different perspective.

~Bang

Like from a house in Alaska to a house in Russia ?

[Bang]

Like from a house in Alaska to a house in Russia ?

exactly!

~Bang

[adam@section118]

I think that's fair. I'll tell you, the one thing that REALLY burned me about the whole healthcare mess was that Obama promised over and over during the campaign that the entire debate would be televised; and that there wouldn't be any back-room deals. And instead, we got Pelosi's, "we have to pass it, so we can tell you what's in it."

I'm not as upset over the stimulus, even though we were told the whole point of it was to keep unemployment under 10%, and it happened anyway. But I have gotten some roads I use a lot re-paved as a result of the money we spent, so I did get some benefit there.

I just don't see that much has changed for the better. We're pursuing the wars essentially the same way. We're spending money at even higher rates. And socially, there's as big a gap between us as I recall in my life time. I still find myself hoping for change.

What both of you said.

We were promised change. Instead, we got more of the same.

As others have said, his is not a beast made by the right. Or the left. It has been made by both sides.

Sadly, it will not change until we are able to see “real change”, and maybe I am just being pessimistic but I do not see that happening any time soon, if ever.

[JMS]

I think that's fair. I'll tell you, the one thing that REALLY burned me about the whole healthcare mess was that Obama promised over and over during the campaign that the entire debate would be televised; and that there wouldn't be any back-room deals. And instead, we got Pelosi's, "we have to pass it, so we can tell you what's in it."

I'm not as upset over the stimulus, even though we were told the whole point of it was to keep unemployment under 10%, and it happened anyway. But I have gotten some roads I use a lot re-paved as a result of the money we spent, so I did get some benefit there.

I just don't see that much has changed for the better. We're pursuing the wars essentially the same way. We're spending money at even higher rates. And socially, there's as big a gap between us as I recall in my life time. I still find myself hoping for change.

So it doesn't bother you that the Republican party leadership admitted before the debate that they were going to use every dirty trick in the book against Obamacare, not because they opposed the bill or thought it would be detrimental to the US public, but rather in a political ploy to hurt Obama and the democrats...

What you object to is they forced Obama after nearly two years of trying to work with the Republicans and after more than 200 ammendemnts adopted into the bill by the democrats from the republicans; only a handful of Republicans voted for the bill in the house and senate combined...

You think it was Obama who styfled debate, after nearly two years?

I think you are entirely biased and frankly one of the problems with the US political system today.

[NavyDave]

Geroge Washington was a progressive. If it weren't for the liberal ideals of the founding fathers, you would be English. In fact, if it were 1776, you would be a loyalist.

Yeah right. There was nothing progressive him about him. and what was called liberal back then definately is not what we see today.

[Thiebear]

So it doesn't bother you that the Republican party leadership admitted before the debate that they were going to use every dirty trick in the book against Obamacare, not because they opposed the bill or thought it would be detrimental to the US public, but rather in a political ploy to hurt Obama and the democrats...

It bothers me if they don't believe it will reduce the budget. Especially after pointing out the Medicare was double counted to begin with.

It bothers me if they do a reconciliation trick or saying something is budget when it is not.

It bothers me if the senate (1 person) stops all debate.

It bothers me there is nothing at all to pay for Obamacare... its free floating in all things except the measly 700 fine that is in the courts.

edit: (it should be 3/4's of the cost of care so when they end up in the system when sick the average isn't so far off). There should be a vat tax of say 10%.

I think you are entirely biased and frankly one of the problems with the US political system today.

edit: (I was just quoting you verbatim on this, I don't actually mean it). I think your opposing view is fantastic.

[NavyDave]

I think NavyDave would have been a slave in 1776 actually. Unless I am utterly confused.

The White and Native American parts of me would disagree. I probably would have been just another slave owner With a Permanent Tan (the first slave owner in the USA was black by the way) who would also bring in indentured servants so even you too could make something out of a meager existence at the time

---------- Post added March-11th-2011 at 01:00 PM ----------

both parties have spent us into oblivion. The Dems just do it faster and with less shame.

So true

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

both parties have spent us into oblivion. The Dems just do it faster and with less shame.

Have you ever bothered to look at how deficits grow under Democrat administrations versus Republican administrations or do you just parrot whatever Rush Limbaugh says?

This idea that the two parties are the same needs to stop.

Democrats have abandoned their core principles to a disgraceful point in my view, there is a fundamental difference between the two parties in 2010. One actually attempts to address the issue. One does not. Democrats are simply better at governing. It's the difference between a poor parent and an absent parent on too many occasions. But one attempts to run the country. The other views itself as a full-time piece of political performance art - at least at this point.

There are a few Republican governors who are proving themselves to be mature leaders, I will argue. I don't agree with everything Christie in NJ is attempting, but his politics are grounded in reality.

Obama has driven me insane over the last two years. But, he is a grownup. That alone qualifies as something praiseworthy in our current political environment.

I really hate the for every X...there is a Y argument. Rachel Maddow is not Glenn Beck. Maddow views the world from a left-leaning persepctive. Glenn Beck views the world from a crazy person perspective. Jon Stewart is not Rush Limbaugh. One views the world from a left-leaning reality. One views the world from reflexively right-wing echo chamber. Paul Krugman is not Ann Coulter. Bill Clinton is not Sarah Palin. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Democratic Underground may in fact be Free Republic but it's not a perfect analogy.

---------- Post added March-11th-2011 at 02:06 PM ----------

So true

Example please.