It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:55 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Well, GOP social issues tend to be on the side on restricting other people's personal behavior. I'll ignore abortion for now because one could argue that there is more than one individual involved. But on issues like weed legalization and gay marriage, it's pretty clear that the Republican line is to limit people's freedoms. I don't think it's any of their business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:00 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
are you responding to me? cause i totally agree.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:04 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
No, more to NYI.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:17 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
And in response to YIR, I don't want the GOP to stay far right because in this fucking two-party system we have, the "alternative" keeps moving father to the right themselves. Maybe, maybe, just maybe (I know this is far-fetched) if the GOP starts acting like it's the 20th Century, much less the 21st, then the "left" would be willing to start actually doing some progressive and liberal things, because they won't be fighting to keep the status quo of 1970's Republicanesque policies. Yes, this is a center-right country. But I'd like it if we could have ONE party at least at the center, if I can't hope for a left-leaning party. Because what we have now is one far-right party, and one fairly-far right party IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:42 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7475
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
Oh, so I didn't realize you only get one shot at things, and you have to abandon the idea if it doesn't fly.

Well it took every ounce of political power they had in 08/09 to get that done. How on earth with even less power in congress will the get another shot?
To implement single payer you'd need Democratic supermajorities and I bet even then they'd have a hard time convincing members of their own party to vote for it.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:43 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7475
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
Well, GOP social issues tend to be on the side on restricting other people's personal behavior. I'll ignore abortion for now because one could argue that there is more than one individual involved. But on issues like weed legalization and gay marriage, it's pretty clear that the Republican line is to limit people's freedoms. I don't think it's any of their business.

The GOP needs to wake up and realize almost all their stances on social issues are long term losers.
It's the reason I'm a Libertarian and not Republican.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:49 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Crosscheck wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
Oh, so I didn't realize you only get one shot at things, and you have to abandon the idea if it doesn't fly.

Well it took every ounce of political power they had in 08/09 to get that done. How on earth with even less power in congress will the get another shot?
To implement single payer you'd need Democratic supermajorities and I bet even then they'd have a hard time convincing members of their own party to vote for it.

No doubt about that. I'm not saying it's gonna be easy, just that some ideas are worth challenging our preconceptions over. (Like the idea a sentence shouldn't end with a preposition ;) ).


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:51 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
how about a sentence inside parenthesis with the punctuation outside of it?


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:52 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
I'm a rebel. You can't control me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:56 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
STOP TELLING ME WHAT TO DO, MOM! YOU'RE NOT EVEN COOL!


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:57 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
I don't think the Republican Party needs to abandon social issues, I think they need to abandon backing their stance on those issues with "because the bible says so and your science is wrong."

Of course that opens up a whole new can of worms in regards to the credibility of various "scientific" groups.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:10 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
To jump back to this campaign specifically, I think you can't underestimate the influence of Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert. They showed night after night what shit the GOP was pedaling in a way that Fox News just couldn't. I think that's because the GOP is more full of shit, but whether or not that's true, I think the right is losing the media war badly among the population with brains.

edit: and I know that's a shitty thing to say about population with brains. Everyone does have brains, but not a lot of the population really takes much time to analyze issues in depth. And that's what I mean here of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:18 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
To jump back to this campaign specifically, I think you can't underestimate the influence of Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert. They showed night after night what shit the GOP was pedaling in a way that Fox News just couldn't. I think that's because the GOP is more full of shit, but whether or not that's true, I think the right is losing the media war badly among the population with brains.


I don't know how much of an effect that really has. I would imagine that most of the people who watch Stewart of Colbert were already in the bag for Obama anyway.

I think Mitt Romney was just a bad candidate. He came across as elitist, soulless, and a flip-flopper. The American public wants to vote for a candidate they'd "like to have a beer with," that (seems to) empathize with their situation, and that sticks to their convictions.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:22 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
PatGreen wrote:
ironyisadeadscene wrote:
your going to see a much different, more moderate, GOP in 4 years. the social issues will be much less focused on, and theyll be more about fiscal conservationism. IMO.

same sex marriage, and abortion wont be pushed as much.

this should have been the case anyways. this is so many people want their state to secede. it's not fair for an entire country to be divided on issues that the government was never designed to regulate. all of these social issues that are a total waste of federal resources and an abuse of federal power should be designated to states in their entirety. marijuana, abortion, gay marriage, etc. everything. it does NOT belong at the federal level. it is dividing a country and creating hatred and mistrust and everything that spells anarchy between states and people based on goddamn lines on an electoral votes map.

it's not fair for anyone to have the middle 2/3s (land wise) of a country all believe one thing and the coasts believe the other. i understand that the popular vote and electoral are to ensure that it is a popular opinion. but with such polarized beliefs it is not healthy with this system.

few people would have issues with republicans if they were to abandon social issues. you would still have the original republican ideals that have since become libertarian - pertaining to defense and fiscal issues. you would still have democrats with their social programs.

the parties would still be different but they would NOT be as polarized. think of how many people (myself typically included) that are socially liberal but otherwise fairly conservative. i have to hate every candidate that ever has a chance to win the office.

i know people will be upset if states get to regulate social issues because then they still feel like someone else is in charge of their bodies, civil rights, whatever. here's the deal. you can choose what state to live in. i'm sick of hearing comparisons of gay marriage and right to choose to slavery. it's not the same, it will never be the same. when the north got rid of slavery....the slaves escaped or moved to the north. then when things cooled off, they went where they wanted to be. no, it's not fair to them. but it's not fair to the millions opposed in a region that people with completely different cultures want to change them. this is all a game of give and take...a marathon. all we see now is that everyone is sprinting to take. it's never going to work.

things won't change overnight. no one should be shoving their shit down the opposed throats. change takes time. if this power were granted to the state, i would imagine that a huge chunk of states would start allowing those things within their borders. then it's a bleeding effect.

I haven't studied europe, but i'm sure alex can comment since i know he's only reading political stuff anymore- but i highly, highly doubt that everyone in each respective country immediately all of these movements at once. it's also fair to point out that the size of our country and historic geographic distribution of wealth dictates that we'd have several very distinct cultures at once. those small european countries that everyone uses as a model are equivalent to getting mass, ny, nj, and ri on the same page. it's not that difficult.

Making a country work is not about polarity it's about working together. Not just the government. All special interest groups. Every. Single. One.


please, for the love of God, do not tell me I hate gays, that I don't get it because i'm an entitled heterosexual white man, or anything like that. it's bullshit.


My favorite part was the slavery apologist part.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:39 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
To jump back to this campaign specifically, I think you can't underestimate the influence of Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert. They showed night after night what shit the GOP was pedaling in a way that Fox News just couldn't. I think that's because the GOP is more full of shit, but whether or not that's true, I think the right is losing the media war badly among the population with brains.


I don't know how much of an effect that really has. I would imagine that most of the people who watch Stewart of Colbert were already in the bag for Obama anyway.

I think Mitt Romney was just a bad candidate. He came across as elitist, soulless, and a flip-flopper. The American public wants to vote for a candidate they'd "like to have a beer with," that (seems to) empathize with their situation, and that sticks to their convictions.

I think among people our age (I realize you're probably much younger than me, but to use the term "younger Americans" very broadly), Stewart and Colbert were and are absolutely huge factors. It was vital for Obama to maximize the younger vote to combat the elderly vote going for Romney. And honestly, who in their teens, twenties, or thirties could watch Comedy Central's news, then watch Fox News and not know which one was truly real?


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:54 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
To jump back to this campaign specifically, I think you can't underestimate the influence of Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert. They showed night after night what shit the GOP was pedaling in a way that Fox News just couldn't. I think that's because the GOP is more full of shit, but whether or not that's true, I think the right is losing the media war badly among the population with brains.


I don't know how much of an effect that really has. I would imagine that most of the people who watch Stewart of Colbert were already in the bag for Obama anyway.

I think Mitt Romney was just a bad candidate. He came across as elitist, soulless, and a flip-flopper. The American public wants to vote for a candidate they'd "like to have a beer with," that (seems to) empathize with their situation, and that sticks to their convictions.

I think among people our age (I realize you're probably much younger than me, but to use the term "younger Americans" very broadly), Stewart and Colbert were and are absolutely huge factors. It was vital for Obama to maximize the younger vote to combat the elderly vote going for Romney. And honestly, who in their teens, twenties, or thirties could watch Comedy Central's news, then watch Fox News and not know which one was truly real?


Fair enough, I don't watch Colbert or Stewart so I don't know for certain. But the people I know that do watch them were already going to vote for Obama.

Perhaps they were more instrumental in simply GETTING people to vote more than steering them towards a particular candida. Maybe that was your initial point and I missed it?

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:03 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PatGreen wrote:
this should have been the case anyways. this is so many people want their state to secede. it's not fair for an entire country to be divided on issues that the government was never designed to regulate. all of these social issues that are a total waste of federal resources and an abuse of federal power should be designated to states in their entirety. marijuana, abortion, gay marriage, etc. everything. it does NOT belong at the federal level. it is dividing a country and creating hatred and mistrust and everything that spells anarchy between states and people based on goddamn lines on an electoral votes map.


So you basically don't think that the federal government should have any role in enforcing equal protection of our citizens?

Abortion and gay marriage, for me, boil down to equal protection. Instead of allowing each person to make a choice about these issues based on their own feelings and beliefs, you have one group trying to make that decision for you. How does that make sense?

It seems like you basically favor states rights over a strong federal government. I respect that opinion, but states rights is what started the civil war, and having a mish-mosh of rules depending on what state you live in is a recipe for MORE division, not less.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:07 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
The turnout point is part of what I mean, but I also think that people that age less interested in politics must be more easily swayed by CC. If you're just leaving the TV on after South Park or Tosh.0 or whatever, Stewart and Colbert are damn fucking funny, and they present more truth in their "fake" news shows than almost any other political TV show you'll find on ANY channel. That includes BS like Meet the Press as well as the 24-hour cable news industry.


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:17 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
Squanto wrote:
PatGreen wrote:
this should have been the case anyways. this is so many people want their state to secede. it's not fair for an entire country to be divided on issues that the government was never designed to regulate. all of these social issues that are a total waste of federal resources and an abuse of federal power should be designated to states in their entirety. marijuana, abortion, gay marriage, etc. everything. it does NOT belong at the federal level. it is dividing a country and creating hatred and mistrust and everything that spells anarchy between states and people based on goddamn lines on an electoral votes map.


So you basically don't think that the federal government should have any role in enforcing equal protection of our citizens?

Abortion and gay marriage, for me, boil down to equal protection. Instead of allowing each person to make a choice about these issues based on their own feelings and beliefs, you have one group trying to make that decision for you. How does that make sense?

It seems like you basically favor states rights over a strong federal government. I respect that opinion, but states rights is what started the civil war, and having a mish-mosh of rules depending on what state you live in is a recipe for MORE division, not less.


Not to mention a strong federal government is at the core of this country's development. Not everyone wanted to go to war against England. There were several different schools of opinion, many of them down regional lines, about what such a thing would mean. To some it meant freedom from oppressive taxes. Others feared that war would weaken their ability to stave off Native American Attacks. Still others thought the American Patriots posed a greater threat to their personal freedoms than the British crown.

The history lesson aside, arguing against policies that protect LGBT Americans because it will bother other Americans seems to be a poor argument in general, and may run contrary to American ideals in general.

Not to mention the argument fails to take into account the fact that many LGBT are minors and are incapable of moving.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:14 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7475
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Not to mention a strong federal government is at the core of this country's development.

Image

I wouldn't characterize our Federal government as strong until WWI...maybe even later, after the great depression WWII and FDR willed it into existance.
A strong federal government certainly wasn't one of our founding principles.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron