Why Republicans Make Sore Losers

Glaucus

Active Member
Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
4,767
Reaction score
697
Why Republicans Make Sore Losers

Former Vice President Dick Cheney's enthusiastic bashing of the Obama administration—for making the United States vulnerable to terrorist attack (even though the last one happened on his watch); for running up the deficit (even though Cheney once told then-Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill that "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter"); for shaking hands with Hugo Chávez (even though Cheney's mentor, Don Rumsfeld, was once photographed shaking hands with Saddam Hussein); and for extending government bailouts beyond the financial industry (even though, four months earlier, Cheney had chewed out congressional Republicans for refusing to bail out the auto industry)—is a case in point. It's been noted widely that Al Gore raised some eyebrows when he gave a speech criticizing the Bush administration's rush to war against Iraq and its doctrine of pre-emption. But this occurred a year and eight months into Bush's first term. Cheney, by contrast, was out of the gate a mere two weeks after Obama was sworn in.

Hmmm... Who does that sound like? ;-)
 
Glaucus said:
Hmmm... Who does that sound like? ;-)
Personally I take Cheney's vocalization as a sign the Banana Republicans have no leadership. Who do we hear from? Cheney and Limbaugh.
 
faethor said:
Glaucus said:
Hmmm... Who does that sound like? ;-)
Personally I take Cheney's vocalization as a sign the Banana Republicans have no leadership. Who do we hear from? Cheney and Limbaugh.
hopefully the fake republicans have collapsed to the point that they are completely inpotent.

it would be nice (but unlikely) that Real republicans - in the goldwater mentality - rise up and regain what once, veeeery long ago, was a useful party.

not holding out much hope, tho
 
cecilia said:
it would be nice (but unlikely) that Real republicans - in the goldwater mentality - rise up and regain what once, veeeery long ago, was a useful party.
Scarily the Goldwater Republicans are now the Dems.
 
faethor said:
cecilia said:
it would be nice (but unlikely) that Real republicans - in the goldwater mentality - rise up and regain what once, veeeery long ago, was a useful party.
Scarily the Goldwater Republicans are now the Dems.
it's not "scary".

what is sad is that the republicans have missed this and are obsessed with their "religious" wacko buddies. making them blind to reality
 
cecilia said:
it's not "scary".

what is sad is that the republicans have missed this and are obsessed with their "religious" wacko buddies. making them blind to reality
I agree it's good to not have the neo-con and religious wacko party be a viable.
I guess I'm thinking a bigger scary. The USA duopoly of power is barely better than the 1 party rule of other nations. But, I would like to see at least 2 parties in the running. Of course I always welcome more...
 
faethor said:
cecilia said:
it's not "scary".

what is sad is that the republicans have missed this and are obsessed with their "religious" wacko buddies. making them blind to reality
I agree it's good to not have the neo-con and religious wacko party be a viable.
I guess I'm thinking a bigger scary. The USA duopoly of power is barely better than the 1 party rule of other nations. But, I would like to see at least 2 parties in the running. Of course I always welcome more...
absolutely!

back in the day when the two parties really WERE at least a bit different it was GOOD because things would get a nice balance at least some of the time. and THAT I can support because while I'm not a person that likes to join things, I can see the reasonableness of healthy debate between different POV's.

when both parties are the same everyone is sucking on the same teat.

you only get individuals who have their own views...which is why I looks at people and not parties.
 
Back
Top