The latest Obama scandal

Compared to the freedom-hating communists on your side, the choice is clear.

 

You are so dysfunctional-stupid that you don't even realize communism has nothing to do with "freedom," and everything to do with equality and economic liberation for poor people.

 

I sew...like a sailor...like a drunken sailor....like a drunken sailor that doesn't want to be sewing.

It keeps costs down so I stomach it. Imagine Frankenstein waking up after I'm done with him, if you thought he looked inhuman before...

...as for the chat with the socialist, I don't mind the stupidity anymore, because it's providing real progress for the Democrats.

Some republicans, the moderate ones and the ones who used to ignore politics, are reconsidering whether or not to support the republican party, in no small part due to the republican politicians words and actions over the last four years.

The republican party is breaking apart because of the extremists in their party. That's good, IMO. I don't want the moderates gone, I don't want the republican party gone, but I'm glad to see some of them giving up on their party. In time, the extremists will be sidelined for good, but right now they are driving the republican party straight to splits-ville, and the country will be all the better for it.

My biggest concern is still the direction Hispanics may or may not take in the next decade. Right now they're pro-Democrat, but the republican party is all about religion and traditional family values, things that Hispanics typically agree with. If it wasn't for the ridiculous anti-immigration stance republicans took wayyyy back, they would likely be completely dominant today. The dummies. The extremist's paranoia and hatred for the poor have doomed their party.

I for one welcome all immigrants, they are our future, and I want it to be easier to come here, work, and build a life. republicans really dropped the ball on that issue.

 

...and that he has benefited from it his whole life.

Aspects of Communism and Socialism are part of what makes-up our country...from day one. Blind hatred, ignorance, etc. doesn't allow some people to admit it, but it's everywhere and it's not going away.

Getting rid of either completely would be the end of the country. You like War, famine and death? Remove all aspects of Communism and Socialism from the government and you'll get it real quick.

But explaining that to some people is like teaching fog how to fetch. But it is occasionally fun to make fun of 'em, hehhehheh

 

I think that in the Republican Party what we call the extremists are in fact the mainstream. There are no moderate Republicans anymore or if there are they are truly a silent and cowed and invisible minority. The policies and views of the old moderate Republicans like Hatfield, Rockefeller, and Lindsay are essentially indistinguishable from what we call "liberal" Democrats, while the mainstream Republicans of the old days are the "moderate" Democrats of today.

At least this is how it seems to me from the reading I've done and the people I've talked to. For people like me, there is no place in the Democratic party and if there ever was, it probably would have been back in the 1930s sometime.

Latino support for marriage equality, which I suppose is as good an indicator of social attitudes as anything, is at least as high overall as it is in the general population, in some polls a point or two higher. Predictably older and/or more religious people have a harder time with it.

While being kicked around yourself doesn't automatically translate into support for others who are suffering in the same way, it can reinforce the idea everyone deserves fairness and equal protection even when it comes to things things that you personally might not be all that comfortable with.

As for the Republican attitudes on this issue, I think that they are best represented by Pat Buchanan. It seems that almost everything you hear from Buchanan on the issues of race and immigration, as well as women, religion, and society in general is mirrored in one way or another by Republicans as a whole, albeit often much more crudely and offensively. And when they attempt to hide it, it's actually worse. Watching a Republican try to sound positive about Latino immigration is kind of like watching Christina Ricci try to smile.

 

And I think Kennedy would be too far right of even the tea party today.
“Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” could will be the Tea Party mantra.

“Do not pray for easy lives. Pray for stronger men.”

“The cost of freedom is high, but Americans have always paid it…one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission.”

“It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.”

 

The more I read about BO's multitude of scandals, the more obvious it becomes that his targets are his political opposition & not the nation's enemies. Shouldn't more emphasis be put on catching terrorists than in making conservative groups jump through IRS hoops?

 

Let's take a look at some of the things Kennedy accomplished during his presidency....

One of the initiatives that he wasn't able to get through was his plan to create a Department of Urban Affairs and Housing. This foundered mainly because southerners were afraid (probably justifiably) ) that it would make it more difficult for them to keep blacks and other racial undesirables out of white neighborhoods.

Yep, the whole program sounds pretty right wing to me. Classic Tea Baggery, no doubt about it.

Data from, "JFK, LBJ, and the Democratic Party," by Sean Savage

 

Is that you peeking through your American Flag mini blind? I'll bet you have your assault rifle in hand and your doors triple locked. That sums up contemporary America perfectly.

 

Uhm?
"Laid groundwork for programs that would be put into place under LBJ including a tax cut, civil rights and education bills, and Medicare."
Did you really say that. He proposed a tax CUT? That alone would be heresy to today's Democratic party.

Civil rights over the objection of other Democrats. Increased arms spending and wars.

 

Yes, those "other Democrats" then abandoned the party to become Republicans. Those bigots and their descendants are still Republicans. Not really anything to be thumping one's chest about, and not something that Republicans can hold over the Democratic party. Rather the opposite, in fact.

As for the increased arms spending and wars: The Democratic party is not and has never been more the party of peace than the Republicans. Certainly you of all people are not buying any rhetoric to the contrary, are you? Check out "Republicans may love war, but Democrats wage it" by Charles Davis. You might even enjoy it. After all, its opening sentence is "Liberals are a frustrating, silly lot."

 

I did not realize Byrd, Russel, Thurmond, et al ever switched parties. Would you care to show me any evidence.

 

Segregationists in the South switched affiliation in their thousands as protest against the civil rights legislation, and were welcomed with open arms by the Republican party (see "Southern Strategy"). The fact that you can point to a couple of Democratic politicians who did not abandon the party doesn't negate that. By the way, check your history: Strom Thurmond became a Republican in 1964.

 

And you said "those "other Democrats" then abandoned the party to become Republicans". Apparently they did not all do so.

 

A nitpicking detail which I suppose in your mind saves your feeble response from being completely pointless. I don't begrudge you your tiny shred of dignity.

 

...so the democrats who opposed Civil Rights joined the party that supported Civil Rights?

 

"Supported" was becoming the past tense even at that time. And the Republicans welcomed the racists with open arms and count heavily on their votes today.

 

The "logic" is still flawed...if one opposes the agenda of a particular party, why would one then join that party once the agenda is passed?
That would be like me flipping to the democRat party because I'm against ending the life of innocent children.

 

Sorry, but I was not aware of the Republicans being "fine with" Byrd, Maddox, Truman, Mahoney, Wallace, Duke, Holder, Long, Reid, Gore, Fulbright, et al.