Quote:
Originally Posted by mattpoulsen
This is EXACTLY an example of my point.
You don't offer any solutions. You simply conclude that since I don't jump on board with the ridiculous divisive tactics of Rush Limbaugh or Glen Beck than I'm not a true conservative.
|
Did you read my post or did you cherry pick a word or two then decide to respond?
I listen to Rush maybe twice a year. Did you catch that or did you just see "I listen to..........Rush," and run with it.
Next you say that since you don't jump on board with Glenn Beck, then you're not a true conservative. I gave you reasons why I don't think you're a true conservative and you'll notice how it had absolutely nothing to do with Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh but along with not appearing to be a conservative, you also seem completely disingenuous for pretending I based my conclusions on radio and television talk show hosts.
You say I offer no solutions before we even started discussing solutions. I think the first solution is to STOP ridiculous spending. Does that work for you? You came in hear whining about Republicans while calling yourself conservative and you want to me divisive? Are you typically hypocritical or only when it seems you pretend to be conservative?
Quote:
|
Give me a break! Limbaugh and Beck are probably the most disgusting example of media manipulation in the country. (And yes there are nearly identical examples on the left) And, yes, I actually do listen to them...about everyday. I don't listen to blips...I spend about 2 hours in my car a day and listen to Rush and Glen regularly...but NOT because I'm a fan.
|
Thank you for your divisive comments and lack of solutions.
Quote:
|
Do I trust every newspaper?? NO! But the point is I get my information from various resources. Why would you trust one source like Beck or Rush?
|
Again, I will ask if you actually read my post? You ask why would I get my information from a single source then you offer two sources? Did you even see that your question was inconsistent with itself?
Let's go back to a question in my post. I asked, "Did you notice how most media downplayed the numbers at these protests yet around 20,000 showed up in Atlanta alone?" Do you not understand that that is indicative of me at least sampling multiple sources of the media ("most media")? Do you not also see that I was posting in this forum soliciting information? I was looking for firsthand accounts. Unfortunately it seems you were ready to dismiss these events out of hand with zero consideration for those who may have witnessed the events personally yet you want to criticize me for only using a single source of information.
Again, who is divisive?
Quote:
|
You act as though they have no financial stake??
|
Really? In what sense? If someone has a financial stake in something, does that necessarily mean they are dishonest or are you projecting? When something is in your financial interest are you willing to forsake all integrity just to make a buck? Lastly, what makes you think I accept all information from those sources I prefer without any skepticism or that I dismiss all information from those sources that I do not prefer? Are you a mind reader because you seem to be jumping to a lot of conclusions based on very little information.
Quote:
|
So, everything you read or listen to is non-manipulative but someone who you disagrees with you got their opinion from a corrupt source?!
|
I stated this explicitly where? I implied this where?
Another conservative I listen to regularly is Bill O'Reilly. I completely disagree with him on the subject of the death penalty. I disagree with him and most conservatives that less-regulation in a capitalist society is often the answer to fixing things. I've seen too much greed by companies and corporations to agree.
Quote:
|
Further, why do you draw the line between Bush and Obama??
|
Perhaps if you read my post and responded to my comments you'd know.
Let's see what I said, "I personally drew the line between stupid spending under President Bush and spending that will crush generations."
Maybe I should have spelled it out a little more clearly it seems you read over things quickly and don't give them much thought. Bush overspent but Obama has spent to such a degree that it will cripple this nation. Not only has he dished out cash we do not have (China stopped lending so we just had to print the money out of thin air), he also is working to create programs we cannot afford and will require more spending. I hear Democrats complain that social security is broken because there's not enough money to keep it solvent yet now, with no new sources of income, they are offering to create free healthcare for millions of people. Do you have any clue of where the money for that will come from?
They cannot even fix social security but they propose to add an even more expensive goverment program. How will it be paid for other than with increased taxation? I thought fiscal conservatives opposed increased taxation realizing that more revenue has been generated with lower taxes because of increased growth and production.
Quote:
|
Other than for political convenience?
|
And you call me divisive. You didn't even read my comments or respond to them.
Quote:
|
The first part of the huge spending bills in response to Wall Street's mess came out of the Bush administration! How is that any less hard on future generations than Obama??
|
Scalec just as I said initially and you seemed completely unable to address.
Do you think lending a friend $100 is different than $300? $1,000 versus $3,000? And let's not forget that the friend you're lending to is already maxing his credit cards and is telling you he's planning on buying more things even though he can't cover the bills he already has.
Please go take a look at what Bush spent and what Obama has spent and is promising to spend even more of.
Quote:
|
Further, apparently you don't actually understand economics. Our economy is NOT a piggy bank.
|
Our economy doesn't even have a piggy bank. It was destroyed generations ago. Since the government destroyed its piggy bank it has now come looking for our piggy banks and is promising to take the piggy banks of those who are saving money from allowances from their parents.
Quote:
|
What happens when an economy is booming?? What does tax revenue, when held at CONSTANT rates, do when GDP and revenue ramp up?? Tax revenue ALSO goes up! The idea is to get the economy humming again, then much more revenue can be derived based on the same relative rates. This is an elementary example, but its something that all the loons like Beck and Limbaugh simply ignore. They love dumbing things down and acting like the U.S. economy is akin to a simple checking account.
|
Apparently you also skipped the part that the government has no idea where the money is going. You skipped the part where those writing the law to stimulate the economy did not read what their assistants wrote and threw together in one great hodge podge. You forget that the President didn't read the same law and signed it.
You want to talk elementary economy and ignore that there is a requirement for a cohesive, well thought out economic plan before one just starts spending money. And you want to challenge my understanding of economics? That's a laugh.
Quote:
|
Being a republican does NOT mean simply supporting a republican because he's a republican. Name one republican that has suggested a better option??
|
Are you referring to the spending plan that the Republicans offered and the Democrats refused to consider? You sure are going out of your way to support free-spending Democrats who haven't read the laws they passed and who refused to listen to differing opinion.
Why ask all these questions. You call yourself a fiscal conservative yet every opinion you offered or inferred with your questioning is anything but conservative. How about you tell us what the answer is and what is so great about spending money we don't have on things we don't even know?
Quote:
|
What option have Beck and Limbaugh suggested that's better??
|
Letting companies go bankrupt like they have for over 200 years of successful American economy. They have made the point time and again that bankruptcy doesn't necessarily mean shutting one's doors. How many years ago did the airlines go bankrupt yet they still operate and we haven't seen a decrease in safety?
Obviously you listen as well as you read.
Quote:
|
They simply say that Obama is tearing the country apart and just expect you to accept it as fact.
|
They also condemned Bush for his spending after trying to give him the benefit of a doubt for the first couple years. It was Republican commentators who condemned Bush for his prescription drug spending. But it seems you are too busy being divisive to be honest about such issues.
Quote:
|
Or they start speculating as to what is next and start talking about forced civil service or rationing of food or government controlled news sources.
|
Apparently you missed the government starting to take over the auto industry. you must have also missed the Obama appointee (former biased journalist) who is now advocating for bailing out the newspaper industry. Hmmm let's see how it worked with the car industry...the government bails them out, the government then starts dictating pay for executives, the government starts saying who should be fired, the governement then says what vehicles they should start building....
Yeah, you're really a fiscal conservative. Why do you even pretend?
Quote:
|
Get this...I'm actually a republican who is agnostic and leans to the pro-choice side of the abortion issue. That'll blow your mind.
|
Yes, you're a Republican who is a social liberal. You're point? Heck you call yourself a fiscal conservative but you seem to be indicating through your words that you're actually a fiscal moderate at best but more likely a fiscal liberal.
Maybe you would enlighten us as to what beliefs you hold that qualify you as a fiscal conservative and how those beliefs are consistent with the actions of the Obama administration you're going out of your way to defend.
Quote:
|
'm a republican because I am a libertarian who is a fiscal conservative!
|
I've seen crazy people call themselves sane. I've seen the mentally challenged call themselves normal. I've seen people promote sexuality among children and call themselves moral. I learned long ago to not listen to claims but to judge a tree by its fruit. It seems you think that if you call yourself a fiscal conservative, it makes one no matter what your actions and views are.
Quote:
|
But that doesn't mean that the government isn't involved in the economy!! It means I don't support entitlements,
|
Yet you defend Obama and his entitlement-oriented economic strategy.
Quote:
|
I generally, when at all possible, want the government out of my life
|
So that's why they should take all of our money and spend it for us instead of us succeeding or failing on our own with our own resources.
Quote:
|
(...but that includes my bedroom!)
|
Are you gay? Just curious (not bi-curious however).
Since when has the government threatened to come into your bedroom? Was it during a parade of skimpily clad people doing naughty things with each other on public streets?
Quote:
|
and I don't support laws that strip people of their liberties.
|
Except fiscal liberty. you seem to be completely fine with the government confiscating some people's money to spend it on others.
Quote:
|
The thing is I'm not hypocritical about it. I'm not someone who says it is not okay to strip my liberties but it is okay to strip liberties from those I disagree with.
|
So how much do you make? If Obama places you in a tax category where your taxes don't change but a "rich" man's goes up to 80% to pay for all this spending are you OK with that? If so, how is that consistent with not stripping people of their liberties (property in this case) and how is that consistent with fiscal conservatism?
Quote:
|
The point...the republican party is NOT the republican party of old and it has completely abandoned its principles.
|
So jump ship and defend those who have always been opposed to those principles and are now, at this time, doing the most damage to those principles than at any other time in our history?
Quote:
|
I'm holding out because I don't agree with the democrats anymore than I do republicans and my overarching principle is libertarianism.
|
Yeah, getting together at a tea party asking for financial freedom and shouting down both parties is so anti-libertarian.
Quote:
|
If the democrats would have held an event like the Tea Party under the same conditions I would be saying the exact same thing about them.
|
But they did. You seem to have bought into the propaganda that this was only a Republican thing and that attendees are just in love with them.
Quote:
|
The "tea parties" were a joke and if you don't think they were a function of media manipulation you're crazy!
|
Let me quote you, "This is EXACTLY an example of my point. You don't offer any solutions."
You came in here and whined about the tea parties. You made claims that they were a platform for Republicans to manipulate people yet you ignored them turning down politicians the opportunity to speak at many of the venues and you ignored those who cheered when Glenn Beck criticized Republicans in San Antonio. Instead you've offered empty, divisive, hypocritical rhetoric.
Quote:
|
A few thousand people showing up in a handful of cities isn't much of a turn out.
|
An estimated 250,000 nationwide isn't much for a demographic that almost never protests? Way to be completely illogical and out of touch with the facts.
Quote:
|
Further, what were they protesting?? They were protesting taxes.
|
Really? That was the only thing or was that the only thing your wide variety of sources told you.
Quote:
|
Umm...my question, again, is why weren't they out in numbers when the Bush administration pushed through the first part of the bailout money??
|
Let me know when you learn to read. It's already been answered previous to your post and I've added clarification in this one.
Quote:
|
As far as reading bills go...ummm....have you ever seen the actual bills that go through Congress?? There is no way a Congressman can read every line of every bill. That is why they have staffers!
|
If they spent as much time at work as the average person, they'd have time to do their job. Instead they (both parties) spend much of their time running for the office they already occupy.
Quote:
|
The manner in which the stimulus bills went through aren't much different than the manner in which the Patriot Act went through...its just now the right wing zealots disagree with the result so now skimming the bill is unacceptable!
|
It's always been unacceptable it just hasn't been readily apparent and I love the use of right wing zealots. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds does it? You call opponents divisive yet look at your post. It's actually become comical at this point. It's obvious you're liberal pretending to be conservative. You've shown contempt for Republicans since your first response. You pretend to libertarian yet when people try and take their liberty back from the government by protesting you show more contempt.
My guess is you're antichristian (based on your condescension about "religious extremists") and possibly gay (based on your comment about the government staying out of your bedroom) who is only libertine when it comes to social issues (such as abortion) and that when it comes to fiscal conservatism, you have no clue about fiscal conservatism.
You say we need actual Republican leaders like Reagan. How much did Reagan spend? How much did he appeal to "religious extremists"? Again, I think you're simply pretending.
Quote:
|
The right wing zealots have simply tried to apply minimalistic thinking to the issue and treat everything as though its your son's piggy bank or your checking account. And its just completely intellectually dishonest.
|
Yes, because as a fiscal conservative you know we can spend without restriction, print money when people say we've spent too much and refuse to lend to us, and that it's all so complicated that by not having a cohesive well thought out economic plan before we spend money will never cause an increase in taxes to anyone in this country and thus their fiscal liberties will never be impinged upon.
Quote:
|
I'm not saying I agree with everything in the stimulus package, I'm not even sure if I agree with 50% of it. But that's not my complaint.
|
Of course it's not, you're too busy being divisive and ignoring the fact that the Obama has done everything but be fiscally conservative.
Quote:
|
My complaint was related to the TEA PARTIES,
|
And demonizing anything that is conservative.
Quote:
|
which were completely generated by those with a financial stake in the commentary (Fox, Rush, Beck, and etc.) and were filled with a lot of (not all) people that looked at the U.S. economy as a piggy bank.
|
Where do you even get piggy bank? There is no piggy bank. Protesters are saying that when they have bills and don't pay them, their property is confiscated, their credit is ruined, and legal sanctions are taken yet the government has decided to no longer hold businesses to the same standard and instead insist that the citizens bail them out.
Quote:
|
And they were orchestrated by people who won't apply the same standard to their party (Republican) as they do the democratic party.
|
You spoke about people being intellectually dishonest but it seems you doth project too much. You ignored my points and made accusations. You disregard the facts associated with the issue to prmote your bias. You pretend that all things are equal between the actions of the previous administration and the current and those if one did not protest before, they must remain silent now. Again, you ought to rein in your hypocrisy.
Quote:
|
I'm not even saying I blame the people at the Tea Parities all that much.
|
Not at all.
"they are protesting on the assumption..." You seem to imply that they haven't thought things through.
"To suggest somehow that the citizens in the masses are upset with the administration is pretty silly." Their conclusions are silly.
"but I put ZERO stalk into this display as its nothing but an outpouring of hypocrisy." They are hypocrites.
"People need to turn off Rush Limbaugh and actually read the newspaper for themselves." You imply they are robots and cannot critically think for themselves and only listen to propaganda.
"What they have now are these twisted followers who do nothing but pander to the religious extremists of the party." They are twisted lemmings who I guess are clinging to their Bibles.
"The "tea parties" were a joke and if you don't think they were a function of media manipulation you're crazy!" People who think they actually organized their communities are insane.
"The right wing zealots have simply tried to apply minimalistic thinking to the issue and treat everything as though its your son's piggy bank or your checking account. And its just completely intellectually dishonest." They don't understand simple economics and are intellectually dishonest.
So yeah, you don't hold protesters responsible, afterall they're intellectually dishonest, religious extremists and right wing zealots with not even an elementary understanding of economics and are prone to manipulation by Republican propaganda through talk show hosts and their manipulations.
[quite]But they need to quit listing to just Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. I believe they are being manipulated via the zealots over simplification of the matter and their non-stop doomsday prophesizing. [/quote]
Please list for us trustworthy sources of information. Though I want you to actually respond to all of my questions this is the most important request. I'm sure you have a lot of disdain for Sarah Palin, right wing zealot and religious extremist that she is and all, and you think she's quite stupid based on her inability to proivde an answer on her sources of reading and news information but you aren't on the spot. You'll have plenty of time to respond and think about it. List your sources of solid, unbiased (mostly unbiased) information.
Quote:
|
All I see is simplistic divisive thinking, manipulation, and hypocrisy.
|
Were you looking in a mirror when you typed this or are you simply projecting?
Quote:
|
Yet, I'm supposed to just accept that this was a grass roots upwelling of discontent of the administration. Well, I don't buy it.
|
Of course you can't. You're liberal despite claims to the contrary and it eats you up that someone is protesting the salvation of liberals in the persona of Obama.
Quote:
|
When I see actual leadership emerge from the Republican Party or from Tea Parties then I may change my opinion, but as it is now they are doing nothing but being petty and divisive.
|
As opposed to what you offered here, right?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
