Shutdown!

[Swift]

Oh yeah, the TP is definitely going to fight this one....

it gets even better

I sincerely wish Ted Cruz the best of luck. I hope he manages to either unseat standing Republican senators with Tea Party candidates or splits the party or whatever he and Glen Beck can come up with. I hope he manages to get a Republican Party platform that makes Christianity (and the right kind too) the official US religion (because we know that's what the Founding Fathers wanted) and require real citizens to carry firearms at all times so they can shoot gay terrorists.

He might be the greatest thing that ever happened to the Democratic Party.

[FZR1KG]

Remember McCarthy.
But preferably don't try to think of him at the same time.

[Rommie]

Cruz compared today’s Republican Party to the GOP of the 1970s when “Republicans weren’t standing for much of anything.”

Well he's got a point there, I think it's just most of us wouldn't agree with him on what the party should stand for.

[FZR1KG]

Personally I thing the republicans don't have much to stand on rather than for.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Since GJ brought up Ted Nugent on the BMR forum (and since it's BMR, why post political analysis there? ) here is a conservative telling Ted to STFU

When did conservatives become prisoners to idiotic vulgarity? I ask that question as someone who self-defines as conservative and who is sick and tired of being embarrassed by Ted Nugent.

And sInce there's the question on what Republicans are supposed to stand for....

This isn't what conservatism is supposed to be about. Conservatism is the rejection of ideology in favor of common sense and anger in favor of cool rationalism.

Of course, there have always been intemperate voices on the American right -- from Joe McCarthy to the John Birch Society. (I'm not including Southern Democratic racists such as George C. Wallace because their place on the political compass is impossible to plot.) But the American right has an intellectual tradition that has all been forgotten by the media in recent years.

So how do we explain the rudeness of contemporary politics? Nugent's followers might insist that his language reflects the desperate seriousness of his cause, that any conversation about fundamental issues such as guns or Obamacare is bound to cause a loss of temper. But in the 1960s the Republicans were debating urban riots, sex, drugs and Vietnam -- and yet the GOP sold itself as a party that could resolve these challenges with calm sensibleness. Nixon ran as an antidote to the chaos caused by the left, offering order over anarchy.

So, back in the 70s, the Conservatives were supposed to be the adults in the room, and the Left the messy idealistic "ideology rules who cares over the consequences" kids.

Wait, this is going to get brite foaming on the mouth...

Sometime in the 1970s, the intellectual right made common cause with populism, and historians such as Rick Perlstein tell us that this is when they surrendered their brains to cultural conservatism. But Ronald Reagan was neither inarticulate nor rude. He was happy, sunny, funny, and his speeches so dense with philosophy and history that they make Obama sound like a high school student.

Crucially, he had a faith in the intelligence of the average American, which meant he didn't resort to meanness or bad syntax to win their vote. Reagan would never call an opponent "subhuman."

[Swift]

But the American right has an intellectual tradition that has all been forgotten by the media in recent years.

The media has forgotten it because it hasn't been exhibited in years.

I don't disagree with what he is saying. There has been a long tradition of intelligent, well-spoken, gentlemen conservatives for a long time in American politics. While I have not agreed with everything they've said, it was at least well said and usually had good points.

Unfortunately, both for them and the rest of us, they have allowed conversative politics to become dominated by groups like the Christian Right, and people like Glen Beck, Rush Limbargh, and Carl Rove. I never can quite figure out if Beck and Limbargh are just crazy or bigots or have specific agendas that they are trying to push with their acts - I think it is a little of all three. I think the top item on their agendas is self-promotion. I think people like Rove and Fox News are basically fronts for a strong group of wealthy oligarchs who are trying to control US politics for the own advantages (mostly financial).

The Traditional Conservatives have done it mostly to themselves. They liked the voting blocks of the Christian Right and the Crazies (I put the Tea Party in with the Crazies), but unfortunately for them, they've lost control of these groups. The Christian Right and the Crazies know THE TRUTH and are on divine missions to spread it and are beyond control or rational thought. The Oligarchs are happy as long as they keep making money and I think, more than the Crazies like Ted Nuggent, dominate the direction of the GOP (I'm not sure they are really conservatives, in any real political sense). It is an open question to me as to whether the Oligarchs can control the Tea Party and the Crazies any better than the Traditional Conservatives, but they are at least not bothered by the moral issues the affiliation may raise.

At least that's my take on all of this. I don't have a clue as to how it will turn out.

[Sigma_Orionis]

The Traditional Conservatives have done it mostly to themselves. They liked the voting blocks of the Christian Right and the Crazies (I put the Tea Party in with the Crazies), but unfortunately for them, they've lost control of these groups. The Christian Right and the Crazies know THE TRUTH and are on divine missions to spread it and are beyond control or rational thought. The Oligarchs are happy as long as they keep making money and I think, more than the Crazies like Ted Nuggent, dominate the direction of the GOP (I'm not sure they are really conservatives, in any real political sense). It is an open question to me as to whether the Oligarchs can control the Tea Party and the Crazies any better than the Traditional Conservatives, but they are at least not bothered by the moral issues the affiliation may raise.

Absolutely and they're paying the price now. The irony is that the reverse of this situation happened on the late 70s. While the Left lost control of its idiots, the Right was seen as more reasonable.

[geonuc]

But the American right has an intellectual tradition that has all been forgotten by the media in recent years.

The media has forgotten it because it hasn't been exhibited in years.

I don't disagree with what he is saying. There has been a long tradition of intelligent, well-spoken, gentlemen conservatives for a long time in American politics. While I have not agreed with everything they've said, it was at least well said and usually had good points.

Unfortunately, both for them and the rest of us, they have allowed conversative politics to become dominated by groups like the Christian Right, and people like Glen Beck, Rush Limbargh, and Carl Rove. I never can quite figure out if Beck and Limbargh are just crazy or bigots or have specific agendas that they are trying to push with their acts - I think it is a little of all three. I think the top item on their agendas is self-promotion. I think people like Rove and Fox News are basically fronts for a strong group of wealthy oligarchs who are trying to control US politics for the own advantages (mostly financial).

The Traditional Conservatives have done it mostly to themselves. They liked the voting blocks of the Christian Right and the Crazies (I put the Tea Party in with the Crazies), but unfortunately for them, they've lost control of these groups. The Christian Right and the Crazies know THE TRUTH and are on divine missions to spread it and are beyond control or rational thought. The Oligarchs are happy as long as they keep making money and I think, more than the Crazies like Ted Nuggent, dominate the direction of the GOP (I'm not sure they are really conservatives, in any real political sense). It is an open question to me as to whether the Oligarchs can control the Tea Party and the Crazies any better than the Traditional Conservatives, but they are at least not bothered by the moral issues the affiliation may raise.

At least that's my take on all of this. I don't have a clue as to how it will turn out.

Once again, what he said. ^^^^

[FZR1KG]

You two need to be careful. You may end up sounding like me.

[Sigma_Orionis]

They're already agreeing with me

[geonuc]

They're already agreeing with me

In that case, I'm changing my position.

[FZR1KG]

They're already agreeing with me

In that case, I'm changing my position.

I didn't realize you were a Republican?

[Sigma_Orionis]

You want to drive the poor man to the drink?

[FZR1KG]

It was just here to be said.
I couldn't help it. Honest.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Yeah Yeah, the Devil made you do it

[Swift]

You two need to be careful. You may end up sounding like me.

You know what they say... Great minds think alike.

What's our excuse?

[FZR1KG]

You two need to be careful. You may end up sounding like me.

You know what they say... Great minds think alike.

What's our excuse?

You meant to say, "your", right?

[Sigma_Orionis]

This Pinko Commie Liberal Bleeding Heart Tax'n Spend Economist just had the gall of calling that Pillar of Moral Authority known as Paul Ryan a caricature.


Why?

Because at the latest gathering of the faithful he said this:

“The left is making a big mistake,” Ryan predicted. “What they’re offering people is a full stomach and an empty soul. People don’t just want a life of comfort. They want a life of dignity, they want a life of self determination.”

What really makes it funny is that in the comment section, someone was less than amused at Dr. Krugman's snarky comments.....

He's not saying what Dr. Krugman is trying to get readers to think he's saying. What Ryan is saying is that Democrats promote dependence, which deprives people of the satisfaction of earning their keep. He would say that the Republicans want to "get government out of the way" so that poor people wouldn't be poor, because they would be free to earn an honest living.

Now, Ryan's claims may be nonsense. But he's not saying that going hungry is character building or anything like that.

I wish Dr. Krugman hadn't so totally embraced spin doctor mud slinging. I don't like to be in a position of "defending" Ryan. (Not that anyone cares, especially on this board!)

I think that Paul Ryan went to the Mitt Romney "Open Mouth, Insert Foot" School of Political Speeches.

[Cyborg Girl]

Right, because earning a living wage is being all childlike and dependent and undignified. People should get payed fifteen cents an hour. Suffering builds character! (Unless it happens to Paul Ryan, then it sucks.)

Christ, some people just make me want to vomit.

[FZR1KG]

Let's analyse the term, "living wage".
A wage that enables you to live in exchange for the work you do.

It's still amazing to me that there are people that want you to have less than that.
Note that they are also the people that have no need for such a thing.
They have all the money they need.

[Rommie]

Had a chat with a former eastern Bloc gentleman a few days ago who grew up under communism, and lived for a little while in the USA as well. One of the interesting things he said was what amazed him about the US is unlike in the communist days in the USSR the propaganda in the US is far more effective- no one believed propaganda in the commie days but now so many Americans genuinely do.

One of those things whereby when he said it he really hit the nail on the head for something that had bothered me a long time but hadn't known how to articulate before. It's not that we never had Paul Ryans before in politics, it's just now people actually listen to their tripe without questioning it.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Well if Mr. "Good Honest Conservative Economy Wonk" is reduced to pitch his nonsense using the "spiritual" card he must have really run out of arguments.

Maybe he can get a job as the new Stephen Covey.

[FZR1KG]

Had a chat with a former eastern Bloc gentleman a few days ago who grew up under communism, and lived for a little while in the USA as well. One of the interesting things he said was what amazed him about the US is unlike in the communist days in the USSR the propaganda in the US is far more effective- no one believed propaganda in the commie days but now so many Americans genuinely do.

One of those things whereby when he said it he really hit the nail on the head for something that had bothered me a long time but hadn't known how to articulate before. It's not that we never had Paul Ryans before in politics, it's just now people actually listen to their tripe without questioning it.

The same was the case in the Communist era of Yugoslavia.
The communists had some pretty wild totally unbelievable tales to spin.
It can best be likened to a sociopath making up the wildest stories which at the start are entertaining and makes one wonder about the possibilities but soon enough when nothing happens or the opposite happens the people loose total faith in anything the government says or does.

That's happening to many people in the USA too. Though it will take longer as the propaganda has been far more subtle and far reaching. The most deep one that I have noticed is that many people genuinely believe that they can become anything that they want. This results in the blaming of people for not achieving their dreams because they were lazy etc.
Pretty obviously propaganda since the country needs to have certain slots filled, wait staff, mechanics, laborers, cleaners, road workers, prison guards etc. The jobs that are more desirable start to dwindle in number as they increase in pay or power. If everyone took those "desirable" jobs then no one would be left to fill the roles of the lower jobs and the country would collapse. Yet, the idea still totally flourishes here. People still teach it to their kids which is almost a guaranteed way to have them disappointed later in life.
It's like a fairy tale that people never realise is just a fairy tale.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Well, by the looks of it, seems that the TP Nutjobs are well on their way to rebuilding the same "Conservative Echo Chamber" that made them lose both the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. And maybe they'll even end up causing a huge schism in the Republican Party.

[Swift]

One of the interesting things he said was what amazed him about the US is unlike in the communist days in the USSR the propaganda in the US is far more effective- no one believed propaganda in the commie days but now so many Americans genuinely do.

I can't speak to the USSR, but the people in the US that believe this tripe want to believe in this tripe.

For example, it is much more comforting to God-fearing good Christians to believe that the people in the US going to bed hungry at night are worthless, lazy, dope-smoking n-words who would rather collect welfare (steal money from real people) then work any of the good, character building jobs that are sitting waiting for them. That is a much more comforting image than the children of the working poor, who's parents can only find very-part-time jobs at McD's and Burger King, work two of those jobs, but still can't keep food on the table until the end of the month.