How DOES the GOP do it? (part II)

[CapnAwesome]

That's why their pundits are all regurgitating the same, tired shit, right? That's why they all flip flop at exactly the same moments, right? Fact is, it's multiple people with one agenda.

If you think ALL the republican pundits are saying the same thing, I think you are probably not reading or listening to ALL their pundits. I find it annoying to defend the Republican party, since I'm not a republican, but sometimes you guys come off as people who get all your information from one side of the argument. If you think that, for example, Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee share an agenda, then you are simply ignorant of their positions.

I think a lot of you would benefit from actually reading some conservative literature or listening to their agenda from them and not from people who's sole job is to criticize them. These threads make it painfully clear that the source of information for them comes entirely from liberal sources that are critical of those positions and want you to believe that 'The GOP says.....' as though it's a single group.

Let me repeat that I'm not a Republican, but to be truly open minded it means that you have to be able to view positions from other peoples point of view(s.) Which I think so many people are utterly incapable. Also considering that during the Bush years liberals would bash on him for literally anything and everything, it's totally hypocritical.

[Bad Writer]

I agree with bashing where bashing is warranted. I submit to you that the entire GOP does not say all the same things; that's a statistical impossibility. It is, however, disheartening to hear the pundits say the same contradictory statements all the time. I also admit that I don't listen to all Republican pundits. As a matter of fact, I try not to listen to any of them, but some of their voices get louder than a number of their counterparts.

Also, do you disagree with the majority of things said about Bush? A few things? None? Just wondering for my own sanity here.

[CapnAwesome]

I agree with bashing where bashing is due. I submit to you that the entire GOP do not say all the same things. It is, however, disheartening to hear the pundits say the same contradictory statements all the time. I also admit that I don't listen to all Republican pundits. As a matter of fact, I try not to listen to any of them, but some of their voices get louder than a number of their counterparts.

Also, do you disagree with the majority of things said about Bush? A few things? None? Just wondering for my own sanity here.

I don't know, a lot of stuff was said about Bush, so it's sort of hard to dissect it all. I think that he was a terrible president and especially bad on foreign policy. However some truly crazy stuff was said about him when he was in office that makes the stuff that some people in the GOP say about Obama seem tame and rational (I'm not saying it is either of those things, but just in comparison.) I don't blame Bush for hurricane Katrina or it's response. (seriously, that isn't remotely in control of the president.) Nor do I think that he was part of a secret society bent on controlling the earth. (The ole skull and bones bullshit.) I called out a lot of my liberal friends when they insisted that Bush was going to fake a disaster or terrorist attack to steal a third term (a genuinely popular idea amongst liberals during his second term.) I think a reflective lens and longer memory would serve people well who are so quick to jump on Republican who say crazy things about Obama.

[Lek]

I agree with bashing where bashing is warranted. I submit to you that the entire GOP does not say all the same things; that's a statistical impossibility. It is, however, disheartening to hear the pundits say the same contradictory statements all the time. I also admit that I don't listen to all Republican pundits. As a matter of fact, I try not to listen to any of them, but some of their voices get louder than a number of their counterparts.

Also, do you disagree with the majority of things said about Bush? A few things? None? Just wondering for my own sanity here.

So many people think it's the end of the Republican party. In 2004, after Bush's second victory the talk going around was the death of the Democrat party. Look at history:
1950-1952 Dem
52-60 Rep
60-68 Dem
68-76 Rep
76-80 Dem
80-92 Rep
92-00 Dem
00-08 Rep
08-now Dem

[Minimalist]

[Bad Writer]

This is all I ever hear about from my right wing peers on Facebook. What's fun is when I confront them about this and promptly get "unfriended", which is great because it means we were never friends to begin with.

[Darth]

Well you did just accuse them of racism*, I'd unfriend you as well (if I had Facebook that is) especially if the confrontation was on Facebook. 1) It's a dick move, totally unproductive, 2) People don't want others looking at their Facebook wall and seeing accusations of racism flying around, you're a liability (again, if you confronted them on Facebook, which it sounds like you did).

*you quoted min's image, the main point of the image being that it's racism motivating them, and said you point 'this' out to them.

I do realise a more charitable way to read your message is "that you point out that all you ever hear from your righty friends is those points that are in smaller font and under the big ass racism accusation in the image and that they then unfriend you after you accuse them of being repetitive". But then, I'd not write any message condoning anything in a post like that without making it absolutely clear which part I'm agreeing with. Your post is quite ambiguous, clarify what 'this' is maybe?

[A Theist]

---

---

I recall Bill Maher commenting: "You don't have to be a racist to be a republican....but if you are a racist, you are a republican."

Always with your lying and naive ignorant leftist Bullshit propaganda. Anyone who disagrees with the left is racist. Anyone who criticizes Obama is racist. Anyone who wants to curb spending and reform government programs is racist. White Conservatives are racist. Black Conservatives and Black Libertarians who speak out against the opiate of government programs are Uncle Toms...Everybody's a racist who doesn't goose step to the leftist ideology...Yada, Yada, Yada. The only real racists are the naive lily white far-left ideologues who believe Blacks and other minorities aren't smart enough to get along through life with out their guidance. I've also seen far-left lily whites on this forum feeling pretty free and comfortable throwing the 'N' word around, (claiming to make a point). That doesn't seem very tolerant from someone who claims to champion racial tolerance...FYI you leftist dolts, racism has no political or racial boundaries. Intolerance and racism isn't exclusive to just Whites. Racism has been a profitable business to hustlers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Where's the lily white far-left's preaching of racial tolerance when the New Black Panthers call for race wars and killing 'Crackers' and their babies? Just more of the same old typical far-left naivety, ignorance, and double standards.

[DeistPaladin]

I must respectfully disagree with your poster, Min, only because we have seen all this before.

Reagan/H W Bush tripled the debt with tax cuts for the wealthy that were supposed to pay for themselves through the economic activity they never generated.

Clinton had to give up all his plans that he ran on and focus on cutting the deficit. He created a surplus and my understanding is that we were projected to pay off the debt within a generation.

W Bush ran on the platform that the surplus was bad. "That's not the government's money!" He was going to give all that money back with a huge tax cut for the wealthy that would make Reagan look like Robin Hood. These tax cuts were supposed to generate massive economic activity and create jobs. W Bush doubled the debt and wrecked the economy.

Obama comes into office and we're right back to "OMG! Where did all this debt come from? Quick, slash and burn liberal programs now!"

As much as there is an undercurrent of racism in the GOP, particularly among the Birthers, what we're seeing is what's been called "The Clinton Playbook" which involves scare-mongering on deficits to slash only liberal programs (Defense spending, corporate welfare and tax cuts are off the table), scandal-mongering (trying to endlessly sniff out "even the appearance of impropriety" and looking for any excuse, however lame, to impeach) and rage-mongering (looking for the new Whitewater).

Although I will say that Clinton never had to produce a birth certificate.

[DeistPaladin]

I don't know, a lot of stuff was said about Bush, so it's sort of hard to dissect it all. ...some truly crazy stuff was said about him when he was in office that makes the stuff that some people in the GOP say about Obama seem tame and rational (I'm not saying it is either of those things, but just in comparison.) I don't blame Bush for hurricane Katrina or it's response. (seriously, that isn't remotely in control of the president.) Nor do I think that he was part of a secret society bent on controlling the earth. (The ole skull and bones bullshit.) I called out a lot of my liberal friends when they insisted that Bush was going to fake a disaster or terrorist attack to steal a third term (a genuinely popular idea amongst liberals during his second term.) I think a reflective lens and longer memory would serve people well who are so quick to jump on Republican who say crazy things about Obama.

Sorry, Capt, normally you post insightful and intelligent things but this is the same, tired, "c'mon, both sides do it" argument bandied about regularly by our corporate media.

Every time a conservative is caught being corrupt, incompetent or abusive, you're sure to hear "both sides" from both conservatives and their fake-centrist enablers in the mainstream media. Typically this argument is followed by laments about the "tone in Washington" and how our country is being torn apart by "extremes on both sides".

The "both-sides-do-it" canard relies heavily on digging deep to find some-crazy-liberal-conspiracy-theorist-with-a-blog (see your argument above) and act as if this somehow compares with mainstream conservative pundits with their own radio or TV shows and massive following. Some liberals were talking about "secret societies" and "skull and bones bullshit"? Really? I never heard any?

Name names for me! Who were these prominent liberal pundits who spoke of secret societies and the skull and bones whatever? Are there any TV clips or radio broadcasts I can see or listen to? Or was this just some-guy-you-talked-to-at-the-water-cooler-and-he's-now-equivalent-to-Sarah-Palin?

And when did Rachel Maddow or anyone as prominent a liberal pundit run a story or publish an op ed piece on the possible fake disaster or staged terrorist attack that Bush was planning to steal his third term? Or was this just something you read on blog-by-some-guy?

Now if your point is that there are crazy people in all corners, you'll get no argument from me. I do remember the "9/11 Truthers" who insisted that W Bush planned the 9/11 attacks. Do you know why I don't consider them to be a reflection on progressives in America? Because most of us laughed at them and still do. Certainly anyone prominent as a liberal pundit, to the best of my knowledge, never embraced or even flirted with Trutherism. Keith Olbermann, often used by "both siders" as an example of rage on the left side, in his angriest of tirades never once accused the Bush administration of planning 9/11.

As for Katrina, while Bush didn't plan for a hurricane to strike New Orleans, the man he appointed to FEMA was a political friend who had no qualifications and the Louisiana National Guard was deployed in his private war in Iraq. So I don't see why Bush gets a pass on that one.

Both...
Sides...
Don't