GOP failure watch

If you could shit sunshine your failure thread would be short too

 

Obama's numbers are going down because of the debt debate and the economy...they have virtually nothing to do with the state of the race yet...when we get to the Olympics people will start tuning in.

 

Duh! The lamestream media.

 

Yeah, the Democrats lack leaders willing to get out there on talk shows and throw haymakers. Reid and Pelosi are effective policy wonks, and decent at getting things done - but even if they had the will to be the attack dogs, I don't think they'd be that effective. They're mild-mannered statespeople at heart. That's true of the whole party right now. The one guy who loved to get out there and duke it out sent pictures of his genitalia to strange women and stepped down. I think it's hard to overestimate the impact of his departure from a PR standpoint.

But I totally agree. The rank and file Dems need to be pounding the podium, vilifying any and all things Republican as anti-American, and generally being as pugnacious as possible. They lack those qualities and I hope their milquetoast rhetoric doesn't get torn to shreds.

EDIT: and Biden should be doubling down on his terrorist rhetoric - not backing away from it.

 

Please tell me you don't mean this literally.

 

It's a hyperbolic way of saying the Dems need to toughen up.

 

Well, ok.

You know what I would suggest the Democrats do? Stop being as much of a failure as the GOP. Then, maybe, you can criticize them.

How to stop being a failure like the GOP #1: Stop bombing Muslims.

#2: Give a shit about civil rights.

#3: End the Drug War.

#4: Stop corporate welfare.

#5: Stop being for an all-powerful Presidency.


Of course, to do all these things, they would have to kick Barack Obama to the curb, so that will never happen, so any criticisms they make can't be all that terrible.

 

OMG - I have never known your positions on these things before!

You should totes start a new party!

 

The point is not that those are new positions, but that those are positions that both the Republican and Democratic parties share, and all are terrible positions which do not benefit the country at all.

These are all positions that a true liberal should support, and a true liberal party should support. Yet, Barack Obama supports the opposite of all of those.

So again, you want Democrats to go after Republicans, but how can they when they believe in so much the Republicans do?

 

Mainstream Republicans. Other than Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, and a few others that aren't well-known, can you name any that don't believe in any of these points?

 

Because there's still substantive stuff where there's real daylight between the parties. Education, Environmental Protection, Economic Stimulus, Healthcare, Social Safety Net, etc. etc. etc.

On all of these things, the Republicans want to cut government out and let the chips fall where they may. Those are huge policy differences, and it should be highlighted that the Republicans are willing to abandon a population that needs help in order to sustain tax cuts for the wealthy.

 

In a recent survey, 87% of Republicans said they wanted less government, while 77% of Democrats said they wanted more.

That's a stark difference -- and that's why it's reasonable for a Dem to be concerned about Obama when he talks about the need to cut spending substantially. That's the clearest signal possible that one is moving from being a Dem to Republican, by reducing the role of government.

 

Actually, he just opposes the government's monopoly of puppy killing. People should be able to kill as many puppies as they want.

 

I'm of the opinion that there is probably plenty of spending to be cut without reducing the effectiveness of government. Obama said last night on his interview with Blitzer that the cuts to Medicare he's interested in making are on the cost side, not reductions in services to recipients. I've worked in enough bureaucracies to know that there is almost always an opportunity to be more cost effective without reducing the quality of service. I am for an improvement in the efficiency of delivery of public services by the government.

It's when you start reducing the quality and scope of services available to the public that I get my panties in a bunch. And I get doubly bunchy when you cut services that save pennies in the near term despite known, proven huge cost impacts later (for example: family planning, preventative health care, early-childhood education).

I do think our President is trying to cut the cost of delivering services, not the services themselves. And I'm ok with that.

 

Funny, funny vid....

Conan on Rick Perry

 

Big cat strikes again.

 

This is as stupid as calling Republicans fascist. Congratulations, you have rendered all terms meaningless.

 

Congratulations, you have demonstrated your lack of knowledge of the English language. It's ok, not everyone can be experts at English.

If you prefer "statist", then you are free to substitute that.

If not, how would you describe the Bush and Obama administrations? I'd love to hear that.

 

You said that most of the people on these boards are Democratic/leftist/authoritarian. Here's your quote again:

Do you even remember what you wrote?

And saying that we're authoritarian is just as stupid as the poster who called the Republicans "terrorist" during the debt ceiling negotiations.

Then I guess they need to take away my PhD in English.

 

I have corrected your post for grammatical errors and fragmented sentences/phrases.