GOP Reality Show

[robkelk]

... (One thing I'll definitely give California Democrats credit for is that they actually tried to pass legislation legalizing same-sex marriages. They didn't succeed, but that's still better than Iowa's, who as far as I can tell never even made the attempt.)

I know I'm digressing from the topic here...

This is another part of US culture that I just don't understand. Why do you folks make so many efforts to distinguish between men and women? You don't allow same-sex marriage (despite your neighbour to the north having allowed it http://www.canlii.com/en/on/onsc/doc/20 ... 49633.html]for a dozen years with no cultural meltdown) and you never passed the Equal Rights Amendment... Apparently "all men are created equal" but women aren't equal to men. Why?
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[khagler]

... (One thing I'll definitely give California Democrats credit for is that they actually tried to pass legislation legalizing same-sex marriages. They didn't succeed, but that's still better than Iowa's, who as far as I can tell never even made the attempt.)

This is another part of US culture that I just don't understand. Why do you folks make so many efforts to distinguish between men and women? You don't allow same-sex marriage (despite your neighbour to the north having allowed it for a dozen years with no cultural meltdown) and you never passed the Equal Rights Amendment... Apparently "all men are created equal" but women aren't equal to men. Why?

The US is still rather heavily influenced by Christian Fundamentalists. We actually passed an "equal rights amendment" in 1868, but the government just ignores that amendment the same way they ignore the rest of the US Constitution.

[robkelk]

... (One thing I'll definitely give California Democrats credit for is that they actually tried to pass legislation legalizing same-sex marriages. They didn't succeed, but that's still better than Iowa's, who as far as I can tell never even made the attempt.)

This is another part of US culture that I just don't understand. Why do you folks make so many efforts to distinguish between men and women? You don't allow same-sex marriage (despite your neighbour to the north having allowed it for a dozen years with no cultural meltdown) and you never passed the Equal Rights Amendment... Apparently "all men are created equal" but women aren't equal to men. Why?

The US is still rather heavily influenced by Christian Fundamentalists. We actually passed an "equal rights amendment" in 1868, but the government just ignores that amendment the same way they ignore the rest of the US Constitution.

And even that amendment refers to "the male inhabitants" in section 2...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[khagler]

robkelk wrote:
And even that amendment refers to "the male inhabitants" in section 2...

That wording played a role in the women's suffrage movement in the US. Women gained the vote in Wyoming the following year, and in Utah the year after. Note that the Feds subsequently took away the right of Utah women to vote--both their gaining and losing the vote was actually about persecution of Mormons, rather than persecution of women.

Of course, things have changed in the 21st century--now, women are treated equally by the government. That is to say, they may be arbitrarily imprisoned, raped, tortured, and murdered at any time purely on the whim of the President, just like men.

[ordnance11]

His speech to the Ripon society
Part of his speech:

“But listen, we are Americans and we will figure this out. These next
couple of weeks, next couple of months, frankly, the next 20 months, are
going to be a very difficult period for us. While we want to stand up
and fight for more fiscal responsibility, want to stand up and find a
way to move tax reform that will help our economy grow, to do the things
we believe in, we’re going to be doing it in an environment that is
going to be far more hostile than anything that I think we’ve seen for a
long, long time.  We’re going to have to make some big decisions about
how we as a party take on this challenge.  Where’s the ground that we
fight on? Where’s the ground that we retreat on? Where are the smart
fights?  Where are the dumb fights that we have to stay away from?"

i.e....compromise.
I wish him luck on that. The Tea Partiers consider the "c" word to be an act of treason.
On another note, Rand Paul must be one of the most willfully ignorant members on the Senate Foreign Relations committee. First he calls the Benghazi attack the worst disaster since 9/11. It's a tragedy but there had been far worse since 911.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255i.html
The second one was him lambasting Clinton for having the State Dept spend $100,000 to send the Chai comedy group to a tour of India:
This bunch
I'm not sure he realizes the purpose of diplomacy is to at least make people of other nations at least decide we are not their enemies, even if we are not their friends. I would rather spend 100k for goodwill than spend 1 million for military action if it achieved the same result. Since he is making noises about running for President in 2016, I do hope he realized he had just made a political enemy of Hillary Clinton. Before it was politics. Now it's personal. And the Clintons have long memories. Truth be told, I do hope he becomes the nominee. He may just get it, considering the tea Partiers now control the nomination process. And if nothing changes between then and now, he probably looses the election by a even bigger margin than Romney.
Funny, but I had trouble even remember his name during the inauguration.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

I've been listening to the reports from the GOP winter meeting and the main theme is that they need to work on the tone and the packaging of the message. Not the message itself. to paraphrase Sharpe (who was paraphrasing Napoleon): A piece of fecal matter in a silk container is still a piece of fecal matter. How are you going to explain that "self-deportation" is a good idea to new citizens? How are you going to explain to a person who lost a relative to gun violence that the solution is to bring back the Wild Wild West? How are you going to explain to the middle class that the way out of our economic troubles is to bring back the turn of the century..the 19th century that is.

To change the GOP is to have the constituents like the evangelicals and the Tea Partiers realize is that they will have to accomodate views from the rest of the world and vice-versa. Otherwise, watch the GOP start diminishing as the demographics of the nation change.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Foxboy]

Might be a good point for the neo-Whigs to try their push.

They're socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. They'd essentially be a Moderate party, if they had the oomph to be more than "oh, those crazies"
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[ECSNorway]

Might be a good point for the neo-Whigs to try their push.

They're socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. They'd essentially be a Moderate party, if they had the oomph to be more than "oh, those crazies"

I'd probably vote for them.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[robkelk]

Might be a good point for the neo-Whigs to try their push.

They're socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. They'd essentially be a Moderate party, if they had the oomph to be more than "oh, those crazies"

So, they're like the Green Party elsewhere in the world?
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Foxboy]

The Wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Whig_Party
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[robkelk]

So, some similarities but some important differences as well.

(Compare and contrast with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Part ... ted_States )
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[ECSNorway]

Yeah, the Green party is a -lot- further to the left than the neo-Whigs.

Embarassingly enough, I actually know and like a guy who ran for Mayor on their ticket here.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[robkelk]

And here I thought the Greens were centrist...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Morganite]

I've found that what's considered centrist is more dependent on the beliefs of the person doing the classifying than of those being classified...

-Morgan.

[robkelk]

True that. I've lost track of how many times I've heard someone say the US has a right-wing party and a far-right-wing party...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Foxboy]

[joking] Must have been a real Commie Pinko saying that. [/joking]
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[ECSNorway]

Let's see... on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is "Left-Wing Tyranny" and 10 is "Right-Wing Tyranny", my impressions of the current party leadership/prominent officials:

Democratic Party: 1

Republican Party: 7.5

Neo-Whig Part: 6

Green Party: 3.5
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Valles]

Let's see... on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is "Left-Wing Tyranny" and 10 is "Right-Wing Tyranny", my impressions of the current party leadership/prominent officials:

Democratic Party: 1

Republican Party: 7.5

Neo-Whig Part: 6

Green Party: 3.5

Ahahahahahaha. Seriously, drink less Kool-Aid.

But this is an interesting way of framing views, though, so I'll take a shot - leaving aside the Whigs, who I've never really heard of before.

Green Party: 3.5
Democratic Party: 5
Republican Party: 9
===========

===============================================
"V, did you do something foolish?"
"Yes, and it was glorious."

[robkelk]

Let's see... on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is "Left-Wing Tyranny" and 10 is "Right-Wing Tyranny", my impressions of the current party leadership/prominent officials:

Democratic Party: 1
Republican Party: 7.5
Neo-Whig Part: 6
Green Party: 3.5

I suppose you'd think Canada's New Democratic Party would have a negative score, then... and they're not as far-left as some parties in other parts of the world.

We think your Democrats are centrist at best, and more likely right-wing.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[ECSNorway]

Let's see... on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is "Left-Wing Tyranny" and 10 is "Right-Wing Tyranny", my impressions of the current party leadership/prominent officials:

Democratic Party: 1

Republican Party: 7.5

Neo-Whig Part: 6

Green Party: 3.5

I suppose you'd think Canada's New Democratic Party would have a negative score, then... and they're not as far-left as some parties in other parts of the world.

We think your Democrats are centrist at best, and more likely right-wing.

From a quick survey of their website and Wikipedia page I'd rate them a 2. They seem more open than our Crony-in-Chief and his Political Machine.

As for the Thief-in-Charge being Right-Wing... maybe if your 'Centrist' reference point was Joe Stalin, you could call him right-wing... short of that, I can't see it.

And Valles, any President who has actively stated his intention to destroy the national economy, openly and without criticism by the media, can -never- be called "centrist" with a straight face. 
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[robkelk]

Let's see... on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is "Left-Wing Tyranny" and 10 is "Right-Wing Tyranny", my impressions of the current party leadership/prominent officials:

Democratic Party: 1

Republican Party: 7.5

Neo-Whig Part: 6

Green Party: 3.5

I suppose you'd think Canada's New Democratic Party would have a negative score, then... and they're not as far-left as some parties in other parts of the world.

We think your Democrats are centrist at best, and more likely right-wing.

From a quick survey of their website and Wikipedia page I'd rate them a 2. They seem more open than our Crony-in-Chief and his Political Machine.

As for the Thief-in-Charge being Right-Wing... maybe if your 'Centrist' reference point was Joe Stalin, you could call him right-wing... short of that, I can't see it.

And Valles, any President who has actively stated his intention to destroy the national economy, openly and without criticism by the media, can -never- be called "centrist" with a straight face. 

So, your Democrats are in favour of universal government-funded healthcare (not the user-pay system your folks just introduced), legalizing marijuana, legalizing same-sex marriage, and allowing states to leave the Union? Really?
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[ECSNorway]

universal government-funded healthcare (not the user-pay system your folks just introduced)

In what way are these different? It's still paid for by the same people, it's just written down differently in Congress' account books.

Legalizing pot? Yes.
Legalizing same-sex marriage? Yes.
Letting states leave the union? Hell no. They'd lose half the country within a month.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[ECSNorway]

Let me be blunt:

There is no such thing as "government-funded" anything.

There are no "government-funded" militaries, public works, healthcare systems, social safety nets, whatever.

Governments do not generate wealth. They are given it by or take it from the people, and then redistribute it to such places as their bureaucrats feel best.

This place is usually said bureaucrat's pockets, as much as possible.

The proper term for anything where the guys doing the work are getting paid with checks drawn on insert-government-here is "taxpayer-funded".
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Valles]

From a quick survey of their website and Wikipedia page I'd rate them a 2. They seem more open than our Crony-in-Chief and his Political Machine.

As for the Thief-in-Charge being Right-Wing... maybe if your 'Centrist' reference point was Joe Stalin, you could call him right-wing... short of that, I can't see it.

And Valles, any President who has actively stated his intention to destroy the national economy, openly and without criticism by the media, can -never- be called "centrist" with a straight face. 

Um, last I checked, the 'destroy the economy' plan was being spearheaded by this guy. So I'd be... interested... in seeing your sources on the subject.
===========

===============================================
"V, did you do something foolish?"
"Yes, and it was glorious."

[Morganite]

I stand by what I said before. Essentially, the closer someone's beliefs are to your own, the more centrist they are.

It's always the other guy whose policies will destroy the economy too.

-Morgan.