The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obama

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
oaktonhokie
Posts: 11324
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:48 pm

The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obama

Post by oaktonhokie »

for part of the problem for the shutdown.

After she pronounced that we were led here by cruz, and aided by Sunkist.

Now to be clear, the shutdown was NOT because Obama is black.

Whew...

But it is part of the southern strategy that has right wing (my words) as obstructionist.

The new racism is not like the old style where people held signs demeaning Obama. It's more like focusing on negative stereotypes. It's more like the gut wrenching story where a latino on the panel had a conversation with someone who said that blacks and latinos can get all the welfare they want.

The panelist will surely be scarred for life. She's hispanic. Or something... Poor thing.

They all whined about gerrymandering to give Republicans a racial advantage. (Um, artificially carved out safe districts for blacks....)

The hyphen with a listhp will return shortly to continue the discussion on "whether racism caused the shutdown." She'll be back, I won't.
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11909
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obam

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

I made the mistake of watching State of the Union on CNN this morning. They had a 3 person panel - two hardcore democrats (+ Crowley) vs. Newt. Is this what passes for "balance" on CNN? The entire show was about how the GOP is divided and the public views them so negatively that they are very close to extinction. The MSM(D)'s wet dream is for America to be under one party democrat rule. They want no opposition, but if there has to be an opposition party to the democrats, they want it to be a party that is just like democrats.

Of course the narrative wasn't just about how terrible the Republicans are, it was also about how wonderful Obama is, what a great job he's doing, and how unified the democrats are behind him. The President is being perfectly rational and reasonable by not negotiating with Republicans - even if it means going past the debt ceiling deadline. Obama and the democrats may get a little bit of the blame if the US defaults, but as one of the hardline democrats on the panel put it; everyone knows that when you have a skunk in the hen house, you have to get the skunk out before he eats all the eggs and the chickens, but you'll probably get a little bit of the skunk smell on you. The skunk, in the this democrat's metaphor, was Ted Cruz.

The bottom line is, no one should expect Obama to make a deal with Republicans so long as they have people within the party like Ted Cruz that will not completely roll over and do whatever and all of what Obama wants with nothing in return. And that is the (democrat/MSM defined) reasonable position.
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
oaktonhokie
Posts: 11324
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obam

Post by oaktonhokie »

Yup. The democrats want the "opposition" to be a bunch of John mccains, Lindsey grahams and Susan Collins.

The libs would of course label THEM as extremists and radicals. As they move the center to the left.

Until they can say that "Obama is a mainstream democrat. Maybe just slightly left of center."

The NEW center.


UpstateSCHokie wrote:I made the mistake of watching State of the Union on CNN this morning. They had a 3 person panel - two hardcore democrats (+ Crowley) vs. Newt. Is this what passes for "balance" on CNN? The entire show was about how the GOP is divided and the public views them so negatively that they are very close to extinction. The MSM(D)'s wet dream is for America to be under one party democrat rule. They want no opposition, but if there has to be an opposition party to the democrats, they want it to be a party that is just like democrats.

Of course the narrative wasn't just about how terrible the Republicans are, it was also about how wonderful Obama is, what a great job he's doing, and how unified the democrats are behind him. The President is being perfectly rational and reasonable by not negotiating with Republicans - even if it means going past the debt ceiling deadline. Obama and the democrats may get a little bit of the blame if the US defaults, but as one of the hardline democrats on the panel put it; everyone knows that when you have a skunk in the hen house, you have to get the skunk out before he eats all the eggs and the chickens, but you'll probably get a little bit of the skunk smell on you. The skunk, in the this democrat's metaphor, was Ted Cruz.

The bottom line is, no one should expect Obama to make a deal with Republicans so long as they have people within the party like Ted Cruz that will not completely roll over and do whatever and all of what Obama wants with nothing in return. And that is the (democrat/MSM defined) reasonable position.
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obam

Post by VoiceOfReason »

UpstateSCHokie wrote:I made the mistake of watching State of the Union on CNN this morning. They had a 3 person panel - two hardcore democrats (+ Crowley) vs. Newt. Is this what passes for "balance" on CNN? The entire show was about how the GOP is divided and the public views them so negatively that they are very close to extinction. The MSM(D)'s wet dream is for America to be under one party democrat rule. They want no opposition, but if there has to be an opposition party to the democrats, they want it to be a party that is just like democrats.

Of course the narrative wasn't just about how terrible the Republicans are, it was also about how wonderful Obama is, what a great job he's doing, and how unified the democrats are behind him. The President is being perfectly rational and reasonable by not negotiating with Republicans - even if it means going past the debt ceiling deadline. Obama and the democrats may get a little bit of the blame if the US defaults, but as one of the hardline democrats on the panel put it; everyone knows that when you have a skunk in the hen house, you have to get the skunk out before he eats all the eggs and the chickens, but you'll probably get a little bit of the skunk smell on you. The skunk, in the this democrat's metaphor, was Ted Cruz.

The bottom line is, no one should expect Obama to make a deal with Republicans so long as they have people within the party like Ted Cruz that will not completely roll over and do whatever and all of what Obama wants with nothing in return. And that is the (democrat/MSM defined) reasonable position.
I don't believe the country or the MSM has any interest in one party rule, from either party. IMHO, the country would greatly benefit by a strong two party system where both parties make the cases to the people for causes that actually effect people. The Ds are strong right now... and the Rs are fractured. The country does not benefit from govt shutdowns and defaulting on our debt... yet, the TP faction of the Rs seeks to do just that. The fracture is visible because there are plenty of Rs that know better... and know their party is doing great harm to the country.

I would love for the Rs to be strong again. Strength does not come from radical tactics... it comes from changing the hearts and minds of the people. The Rs can be a great asset to the country - hero status even - if they would just take their case for debt sanity to the people and focus on that. And only that. Forget about these useless delays to Obamacare, never ever utter the words ultrasound, let the gays be. Just focus on saving the next generation from the fiscal selfishness of this one. And do it WITHIN the system. If the Rs do this... they will find the nations lonely eyes turning to them...
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11909
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obam

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

You mean you want the R's to be strong so long as they are just like the democrats right?

BTW, Paul Ryan put out a budget that was focused strictly on "fiscal sanity" and he was quickly demonized by Obama and the media as being a cold heartless scumbag that didn't care about the poor, blacks, and old people. Here's the thing. You can't separate the fiscal issues from the social issues. If the Rs try to propose a budget that attempts to get our debt and deficit under control, the democrats quickly turn it into a social issue because anything that touches the budget affects a social program.

And BTW, Ryan's budget wasn't even that radical. It balanced the budget at some point way out in the future (foolishly) assuming some future congress would abide by it.
VoiceOfReason wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:I made the mistake of watching State of the Union on CNN this morning. They had a 3 person panel - two hardcore democrats (+ Crowley) vs. Newt. Is this what passes for "balance" on CNN? The entire show was about how the GOP is divided and the public views them so negatively that they are very close to extinction. The MSM(D)'s wet dream is for America to be under one party democrat rule. They want no opposition, but if there has to be an opposition party to the democrats, they want it to be a party that is just like democrats.

Of course the narrative wasn't just about how terrible the Republicans are, it was also about how wonderful Obama is, what a great job he's doing, and how unified the democrats are behind him. The President is being perfectly rational and reasonable by not negotiating with Republicans - even if it means going past the debt ceiling deadline. Obama and the democrats may get a little bit of the blame if the US defaults, but as one of the hardline democrats on the panel put it; everyone knows that when you have a skunk in the hen house, you have to get the skunk out before he eats all the eggs and the chickens, but you'll probably get a little bit of the skunk smell on you. The skunk, in the this democrat's metaphor, was Ted Cruz.

The bottom line is, no one should expect Obama to make a deal with Republicans so long as they have people within the party like Ted Cruz that will not completely roll over and do whatever and all of what Obama wants with nothing in return. And that is the (democrat/MSM defined) reasonable position.
I don't believe the country or the MSM has any interest in one party rule, from either party. IMHO, the country would greatly benefit by a strong two party system where both parties make the cases to the people for causes that actually effect people. The Ds are strong right now... and the Rs are fractured. The country does not benefit from govt shutdowns and defaulting on our debt... yet, the TP faction of the Rs seeks to do just that. The fracture is visible because there are plenty of Rs that know better... and know their party is doing great harm to the country.

I would love for the Rs to be strong again. Strength does not come from radical tactics... it comes from changing the hearts and minds of the people. The Rs can be a great asset to the country - hero status even - if they would just take their case for debt sanity to the people and focus on that. And only that. Forget about these useless delays to Obamacare, never ever utter the words ultrasound, let the gays be. Just focus on saving the next generation from the fiscal selfishness of this one. And do it WITHIN the system. If the Rs do this... they will find the nations lonely eyes turning to them...
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: The hyphen with a listhp said some might even blame obam

Post by VoiceOfReason »

UpstateSCHokie wrote:You mean you want the R's to be strong so long as they are just like the democrats right?

BTW, Paul Ryan put out a budget that was focused strictly on "fiscal sanity" and he was quickly demonized by Obama and the media as being a cold heartless scumbag that didn't care about the poor, blacks, and old people. Here's the thing. You can't separate the fiscal issues from the social issues. If the Rs try to propose a budget that attempts to get our debt and deficit under control, the democrats quickly turn it into a social issue because anything that touches the budget affects a social program.

And BTW, Ryan's budget wasn't even that radical. It balanced the budget at some point way out in the future (foolishly) assuming some future congress would abide by it.
Why would I want the Rs to be like the Ds? There is no point in that. And just because I have serious issues with the Rs these days does not make me a D... regardless of what posters on this board want to think.

The problem with Ryan's budget was that it was full of unknowns. It did have major cuts to certain programs... but there were no details on how the programs would be cut and who would be hurt by it. That's not a minor detail, that is a major issue.

For example, the Rs say they want tax reform. OK... but what does that mean? Anytime you change the rules, you create winners and losers. If tax reform means the rich pay more (in the form of eliminated loopholes) and corporations can't pay almost nothing anymore then I might be for it. However, if tax reform means that the home mortgage deduction goes away or charitable contributions get capped... what that really means is the middle class loses... and I personally lose... so I would be against it.

The Ryan budget had plenty of those types of things in it. He would not specify how the cuts would be made... we are supposed to trust him I guess. It's a tough game. Ryan won't give specifics because he knows those who would lose out will not support him.

And how are social issues tied to fiscal issues? What does gay rights, women's choice, gun control preferences, etc. have to do with deficit spending? All of these groups have families and checkbooks and may join your side of things if you stopped hitting them over the head for social reasons.
Post Reply