• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

speculawyer

Member
Hitokage said:
Eh, I'm pretty sure the line was suggested as a joke before.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is a joke. Sorta like I the way I say "That socialist Kenyan Muslim". And he obviously doesn't believe in giving a baby (actually shouldn't it be fetus?) a gun. But he does believe in life at conception & everyone having guns, so I can't quite see how he can say it ironically. When I say "socialist Kenyan Muslim" it is a joke because those are all untrue. But he really wants everyone with guns & life at conception.
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
I'm just saying that this is a case where you CAN make it up, and that's the problem. Too many people in high places have become the living embodiment of poe's law.
 
tekumseh

tekumseh

a mass of phermones, hormones and adrenaline just waiting to explode
APKmetsfan said:
I've heard
This line so many times in class. I do tend to agree with it though
Click to expand...


Here's the thing, though. Carville IS right; Obama doesn't care to anger the left, but he is wrong, I think, about why. Obama knows his budget is DOA, but by offering safety net revisions, he also knows they won't be passed, and that just their existence on the table will rally the left and the middle who think they should be left alone and will likely keep them from ever being agreed to by the Dems in Congress, now or ever...
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
tekumseh said:
Here's the thing, though. Carville IS right; Obama doesn't care to anger the left, but he is wrong, I think, about why. Obama knows his budget is DOA, but by offering safety net revisions, he also knows they won't be passed, and that just their existence on the table will rally the left and the middle who think they should be left alone and will likely keep them from ever being agreed to by the Dems in Congress, now or ever...
Click to expand...
Doesn't make sense. Obama wants a grand bargain solely as a legacy item. He continually cites Reagan and Tip O'Neil "fixing" social security in the 80s as a model for what he wants to do. The problem is that today, social security is not in danger nor close to being in danger, and it doesn't impact the deficit. There is no need to cut the program.

Carville also points out Obama wanted to give republicans the farm in 2011, including raising the retirement age. A change that would save a small amount of money while hurting the middle class. There is no policy explanation for any of this, it's all about being seen as Serious and equating both the far right and far left as different sides of the same unruly coin. It's pathetic. I hope we see a complete revolt over this, similar to what happened to Bush in 2005 when he tried to privatize the program.
 
TheLaughingStock

TheLaughingStock

Member
PhoenixPause said:
Carville hits the nail on the head
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.c...hink-obama-likes-upsetting-liberals-video?m=1

Selling a power plant for 35b to lower the deficit? Cutting social security benefits to save 150b over a decade...there's no policy explanation for any of this, it's all Beltway politics. If you raise the cap on social security you fix the program. If you allow the government to negotiate drug prices you lower the deficit and help people. If you make smart defense and Medicare cuts you lower the deficit without hurting anyone. So why are we focusing on boutique cuts that hurt more than they help? This is some of the most pathetic peer pressure I've seen. It's not leadership, it's not smart politics, it's not sound policy, it simply makes no sense.
Click to expand...

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/2012/

I don't get it either. Why does the US government provide automatic financing by law to Supplementary Medical Insurance Part B and D? The Social Security and Medicare Board of Trustees think the US will need to devote 3.4% of GDP in 2035 and 4% of GDP in 2086 to those programs. The trustees report that the aging population and rising health care costs will cause the projected burden of those two federal programs to dramatically rise. Obviously, those factors impact federal programs like Social Security, Medicare Hospital Insurance, and Disability Insurance as well. So what is the rationale for current law? We will surely be running decades worth of deficits between now and 2086. Surpluses and balanced budgets for most or all of that 70+ year period is likely impossible given historical precedent. Therefore, the mounting pressure on the federal budget should still be around in the future. So, why structure the law so that if SMI was expected to cost 6.4% of GDP in 2035, general revenues and premiums simply meet it? Yet arguably the greatest federal program for the US is treated differently? It doesn't make sense. I was also thinking about this picking and choosing with Medicaid because it is exempt from sequestration. Very odd decision making on the part of the US government.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
lol, Fox news:

Jo272UP.jpg


That MHP promo aired a grand total of 4 minutes on MSNBC, yet Fox talked about it for over an hour.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
RDreamer said:
lol, Fox news:

Jo272UP.jpg


That MHP promo aired a grand total of 4 minutes on MSNBC, yet Fox talked about it for over an hour.
Click to expand...

OK, I must be missing something but what do they mean when they say "collective responsibility"? Is it some new Biden gaffe that I missed?
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
B-Dubs said:
OK, I must be missing something but what do they mean when they say "collective responsibility"? Is it some new Biden gaffe that I missed?
Click to expand...

You're thinking way too big.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/46979745/vp/51479213#51479213

A woman almost no one has heard of talks (for perhaps 15 seconds) about how it'd be nice if we thought of children as a collective responsibility, since this would lead to us as a society making better investments in public education.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Gotchaye said:
You're thinking way too big.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/46979745/vp/51479213#51479213

A woman almost no one has heard of talks (for perhaps 15 seconds) about how it'd be nice if we thought of children as a collective responsibility, since this would lead to us as a society making better investments in public education.
Click to expand...

I-I don't understand why this is a problem. Shit, if I were in charge everyone would get free health care until they turned 21. Actually if I were in charge we'd all have single payer, but you get the idea. I don't see what she said wrong, kids can't take care of themselves and require us to. What ever happened to "It takes a village..." huh? Dear god, if this is the new thing I am going to jump out my goddamn window.
 
Link

Link

The Autumn Wind
RDreamer said:
lol, Fox news:

Jo272UP.jpg


That MHP promo aired a grand total of 4 minutes on MSNBC, yet Fox talked about it for over an hour.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Fox News needs something to fill airtime while they avoid mentioning any of the stupid shit Republicans say.
 
P

Piecake

Member
Gotchaye said:
You're thinking way too big.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/46979745/vp/51479213#51479213

A woman almost no one has heard of talks (for perhaps 15 seconds) about how it'd be nice if we thought of children as a collective responsibility, since this would lead to us as a society making better investments in public education.
Click to expand...

And republicans are against this? Well, guess it goes along with their whole, I got mine, so fuck everyone else bit
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
B-Dubs said:
I-I don't understand why this is a problem. Shit, if I were in charge everyone would get free health care until they turned 21. Actually if I were in charge we'd all have single payer, but you get the idea. I don't see what she said wrong, kids can't take care of themselves and require us to. What ever happened to "It takes a village..." huh? Dear god, if this is the new thing I am going to jump out my goddamn window.
Click to expand...

It's not really new. Conservatives have used "it takes a village" as shorthand for "liberals hate families" ever since Hillary Clinton used it as the title of a book. Lots of the yelling about MHP's blurb references "it takes a village" explicitly.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
RDreamer said:
lol, Fox news:

Jo272UP.jpg


That MHP promo aired a grand total of 4 minutes on MSNBC, yet Fox talked about it for over an hour.
Click to expand...

That's where all the FOX Gosnell coverage went.


Piecake said:
And republicans are against this? Well, guess it goes along with their whole, I got mine, so fuck everyone else bit
Click to expand...

If the line "children don't belong to their parents" had been in there this wouldn't have been a problem. My ears perked up at that when I first heard the ad.
 
K

Karakand

Member
Oblivion said:
Forgive my ignorance, but what would be wrong with privatizing the Tennessee Valley Authority? And why are Republicans against it?

I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm not generally for privatizing things, but I figure you could do a lot worse than the TVA. Besides, it's in Tennessee, so fuck those guys.
Click to expand...

It manages the Tennessee River system with its own funds.

If sold, we'd either have to pay for that management out of federal funding or pay for the extra natural disaster relief for-profit neglect would lead to.

And to be mean-spirited, progressive liberals would hate to lose a New Deal icon.

e: I imagine the tax-equivalent payments it makes would be more than the corporate income tax a successor would pay, too.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I know I'm probably late to this, but did you guys see that clip of Rand Paul at that predominantly black university asking the (predominantly black) audience members if they knew the NAACP was founded by Republicans?

Oh, the things I imagine he wrote in his diary later that night...
 
V

Videoneon

Member
Oblivion said:
I know I'm probably late to this, but did you guys see that clip of Rand Paul at that predominantly black university asking the (predominantly black) audience members if they knew the NAACP was founded by Republicans?

Oh, the things I imagine he wrote in his diary later that night...
Click to expand...

I had heard about the reaction, it sounded hilarious. "YES!"

Found a YouTube link to the whole Rand Paul at Howard University, for those interested. 52 minutes, first half is him straight talking and second half is Q&A. I'll give it a listen later. I've heard short preview clips of some parts, he talks about wanting the change the Republican party image that is unsympathetic to black people or people making bad decisions (he mentioned them separately so it wasn't exactly a gaffe if I recall) into the Party of Emancipation and he also talked about government sanctioned racism. Toni Morrison shout-out.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
The Republican culture war is coming to a slow, painful death, as larger numbers of Americans support gay marriage, immigration reform and gun control. Forty-seven percent of Americans now disagree with the Republican Party’s approach to cultural and social issues according to a new poll.

By 47 percent to 22 percent, Americans say they disagree with the GOP’s approach to social and cultural issues, according to a new NBC/WSJ poll. There’s a thirty-eight percent-to-37 percent margin of those who disagree with the Democrats approach to social and cultural issues. While neither number is great, the Republicans have a whopping 47% of the respondents disagreeing with their approach on cultural/social issues.

Asked what they thought of when they hear the terms “social and cultural issues”, the highest response at 22% indicated that they think of gay rights,15% think of tolerance, 8% of abortion, 7% of race equality and “illegal immigrants”, while at the bottom 1% lay legalization of marijuana, environmental issues, feeding the hungry, American values, and a better standard of living.

Six percent think of civil rights/equal rights, while an equal number think of “handouts/welfare”. Five percent think of gun rights, while Christian values comes in at 3%, alongside family and creation of jobs.

Bear in mind that 74% of the respondents were white, while just 12% were black, 3% were Asian and within “other” at 4%, just 5% were Hispanic. In other words, they polled a disproportional amount of whites. When just 22% of predominately white respondents disagree with your approach to social issues and your party is comprised of mostly whites, you’ve got a large problem. Republicans have lost the culture war, they just refuse to face this fact.

This poll comes on the heels of the letter conservative groups wrote to the Republican National Committee, insisting that the party not change its discriminatory platform against same-sex marriage. The number one issue for Americans in terms of social and cultural issues was gay rights at 22%, so that suggests that the strongly negative reaction to the Republican Party’s approach is being colored by their discriminatory approach to gay rights.

Democrats used to live in fear of the God, Guns, and Gays chants of the Republican Party, but the times are changing. Republicans are now caught in the middle of an inner-party civil war on the very cultural issues that have defined the party and served as a reliable get out the vote mechanism. If they continue catering to the extremist social positions falling out of favor with the majority of Americans, they can’t win national elections, but if they soften on social issues they lose the only reliable vote other than the top 1%.

The time has come to see if the Republican Party can pull itself up by its own bootstraps in order to compete successfully in the market they claim to love so much. If not, they’ll have to lay in the bed of intolerance they so gleefully made during the their heyday of yesteryears.
Click to expand...

Delicious.
KuGsj.gif
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
TacticalFox88 said:
Delicious.
KuGsj.gif
Click to expand...

The time has come to see if the Republican Party can pull itself up by its own bootstraps in order to compete successfully in the market they claim to love so much. If not, they’ll have to lay in the bed of intolerance they so gleefully made during the their heyday of yesteryears.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, today:

RNC Reaffirms Support For Prop 8 In Hollywood Meeting

Republican National Committee members met in Hollywood, one of the most gay friendly places in the country, on Friday and passed a series of resolutions reaffirming the party's support for marriage between one man and one woman, including California's Proposition 8, the 2008 law banning gay marriage currently under review by the Supreme Court.

Via TIME:

A resolution introduced Wednesday by Michigan committeeman Dave Agema, who came under fire last month for posting an article describing gays as “filthy” on his Facebook page, passed the full RNC by a voice vote and without debate. A second resolution reaffirming “core values” of the party — including opposition to same-sex marriage — was also passed.​

Party leaders, including RNC Chair Reince Priebus, have recently been pushing a plan to broaden their appeal to younger and minority voters by softening their stance on social issues. A group of social conservatives, however, responded in a letter threatening mass exodus should the party officially adopt gay marriage.
Click to expand...
Held in the thrall of the extremists in the party. Dragging them straight down. GG, fellas.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
TacticalFox88 said:
Delicious.
KuGsj.gif
Click to expand...

It has been a long time coming but it seems the day is finally here.

It seems they are losing on almost all the 'cultural issues':
gay rights . . . losing badly
guns . . . around even
abortion . . . losing
immigration . . . losing barely

But the thing is, it will probably get worse for them every year from here on out.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
speculawyer said:
It has been a long time coming but it seems the day is finally here.

It seems they are losing on almost all the 'cultural issues':
gay rights . . . losing badly
guns . . . around even
abortion . . . losing
immigration . . . losing barely

But the thing is, it will probably get worse for them every year from here on out.
Click to expand...

The death of the GOP can't come soon enough.

It's a cancer that somehow is still dividing and growing new cells.

Hopefully Hillary will bring some chemotherapy of her own in 2016.
 
Z

zero shift

Banned
To be fair one has to remember things are done state by state, town by town. The numbers of these opinions of where the GOP has ground probably isn't as strong. But nevertheless times are changing.
 
G

Giant Panda

Member
speculawyer said:
It has been a long time coming but it seems the day is finally here.

It seems they are losing on almost all the 'cultural issues':
gay rights . . . losing badly
guns . . . around even
abortion . . . losing
immigration . . . losing barely

But the thing is, it will probably get worse for them every year from here on out.
Click to expand...

Actually they've been winning on abortion recently. It's going to take a more liberal Supreme Court to bring back victory.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
speculawyer said:
It has been a long time coming but it seems the day is finally here.

It seems they are losing on almost all the 'cultural issues':
gay rights . . . losing badly
guns . . . around even
abortion . . . losing
immigration . . . losing barely

But the thing is, it will probably get worse for them every year from here on out.
Click to expand...
They've been winning on guns. It's more of a regional issue where members of both parties deal with districts that are rabidly pro gun.

It's true conservatives are winning on abortion in the SC but they are losing in the realm of public opinion. The issue was largely settled years ago yet it's impossible for republicans not to take extremist positions on it or offend people with ridiculous comments; expect the same thing to play out with gay rights over the next decade.

My only wish is that we see an social values extremist get the GOP nomination soon. A Santorum type getting annihilated would give the GOP an excuse to move into the future while ending the last excuse of social conservatives ("if only we had a candidate who expressed traditional values!"). They'll never fully reject social conservatism due to the south, but a public shaming would definitely put the social libertarian wing in charge. Which I'd sure as hell prefer.
 
K

KtSlime

Member
speculawyer said:
It has been a long time coming but it seems the day is finally here.

It seems they are losing on almost all the 'cultural issues':
gay rights . . . losing badly
guns . . . around even
abortion . . . losing
immigration . . . losing barely

But the thing is, it will probably get worse for them every year from here on out.
Click to expand...

At least both sides are winning the war on poverty the poor.
 
tekumseh

tekumseh

a mass of phermones, hormones and adrenaline just waiting to explode
PhoenixPause said:
Doesn't make sense. Obama wants a grand bargain solely as a legacy item. He continually cites Reagan and Tip O'Neil "fixing" social security in the 80s as a model for what he wants to do. The problem is that today, social security is not in danger nor close to being in danger, and it doesn't impact the deficit. There is no need to cut the program.

Carville also points out Obama wanted to give republicans the farm in 2011, including raising the retirement age. A change that would save a small amount of money while hurting the middle class. There is no policy explanation for any of this, it's all about being seen as Serious and equating both the far right and far left as different sides of the same unruly coin. It's pathetic. I hope we see a complete revolt over this, similar to what happened to Bush in 2005 when he tried to privatize the program.
Click to expand...

Obama knows his legacy will ultimately be made via the Affordable Care Act and the impending immigration compromise. His willingness in 2011 was based on his belief that John Boehner might actually compromise and raise taxes, which he refused to do. Boehner bent in January, because they lost the '12 elections, but they're obviously not going to break again and close the tax loopholes he said would work in '11. so I think Obama realizes the right will continue to refuse to cave to additional revenue, and therefore, he can offer whatever he wants as a carrot, because it will never happen, thereby resolving the courage of the left to never accept it and paint the right as the continuing obstacle to progress. This is a midterm election offer, plain and simple.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
943
dragonyeuw replied
The Drunk GAF Containment Thread
Social Community 7 8 9 10 11
517
10K
Artoris replied
What are you thankful for this turkey day?
17
835
MaestroMike replied
Bad games with redeeming qualities
2 3
116
5K
Koenigssee replied
Next Generation is going to be really strange because of A.I
2
58
2K
midnightAI replied
Top Bottom