There may be hope for the Republican party after all!

@faethor

There you go again. We are paying the piper now for Clinton era politics (see subprime mortgages). Of course you will counter it was really Regan and I will counter with FDR. This can go on forever, but really it was Clinton.

Tea Baggers like Palin? I wouldn't make that connection so quick.
 
redrumloa said:
There you go again. We are paying the piper now for Clinton era politics (see subprime mortgages). Of course you will counter it was really Regan and I will counter with FDR. This can go on forever, but really it was Clinton.

Tea Baggers like Palin? I wouldn't make that connection so quick.
Click to expand...
To scare you...you're right. Subprime mortgages could have been handled better. But, they are not the only problem with the economy. Historically the way to build weath has been through manufacturing. Clinton's problem is he bought the conservatives ideas of open markets and failing to protect America's industries. Definitely he added to problems created by Reaganism going away from protections that carried our growth of wealth from the 1780s to the 1970s.

Look at FDR's time. When an economic insentive program occurred it built America. Why? Someone without a job was given a job. They spent money. They bought a toy for their kids. The $ for that toy went to American companies and American workers. Again American workers spent money for goods in America and this helped to build the economic system. Look at our nation (now under Obama but 2 years ago under Bush it was the same) an economic incentive program occurs. Those out of a job are given work. They buy a toy and 85% chance that money goes out of the US to a foreign nation. The money spent doesn't have the cyclical effect in our economy now that it had in the 1940s or 1950s. We ship the money to the world.

You posted the 'Obama' jobs map of America. Obama was sworn in at the end of Jan 2009. They need one that shows total jobs instead of % unemployeed. But, you can work the numbers the same way if you know the population estimates. Look at jobs in Feb 2009 vs jobs at Feb 2001. Netted the Bush era created no jobs.

Tea Party's recent for profit convention paid Palin over $100K to speak and she got many kudos from the group. The question is will the Tea Party feel compelled to seperate from their Republican roots and do their own thing.
 
faethor said:
I guess that's what I see as the problem. The President isn't someone I'm going chat with on the back porch drinking Sweet Tea. Nor should she/he. That doesn't mean they can't care about the us or the nation.
Click to expand...
I always found that kinda funny too, that people feel the need to connect to a leader on a personal level. It's like being best friends with your mom or something. Vote for the one who'll get the job done and save the drinks for your friends. So ya, Palin's folkiness is a turnoff for me, even if she'd be fun to hang out with otherwise. Same goes for Bush - probably a blast at parties but not the guy I'd want running the country (and I'm sure Fluffy will jump and point out that Bush never did run the country, but you get my point :wink: ).
 
Glaucus said:
I always found that kinda funny too, that people feel the need to connect to a leader on a personal level. It's like being best friends with your mom or something. Vote for the one who'll get the job done and save the drinks for your friends. So ya, Palin's folkiness is a turnoff for me, even if she'd be fun to hang out with otherwise. Same goes for Bush - probably a blast at parties but not the guy I'd want running the country (and I'm sure Fluffy will jump and point out that Bush never did run the country, but you get my point :wink: ).
Click to expand...

I agree only if we are talking extremes here. I don't feel the need to connect with a candidate as if they were a soul mate. OTOH I don't want an elitist who thinks the will of the nation (and the founding fathers) doesn't matter because they aren't smart enough to think for themselves (see Obama).
 
redrumloa said:
OTOH I don't want an elitist who thinks the will of the nation (and the founding fathers) doesn't matter because they aren't smart enough to think for themselves (see Obama).
Click to expand...

There is a difference between elite and elitist. You don't here much about "elitist" athletes, for example.

Common people can be elitist just as much as elite people can. Elites can also be egalitarian. The proposition that everyone has to work together to save the country then that is not elitist - unless the message is everybody BUT the elites. Sarah Palin is an elitist. Bush is an elitist. They both have a sense of entitlement, a sense that they are chosen and special and are above the common people. Bushes privilege comes from family and Palin's comes from her nutty pastor. Both of them. Bush may too have religious convictions of chosen-ness but it is less clear to me that it is geniune or political artifice.

But Bush and the whole Bush family are definitely elitist.

The founding fathers, by the way, were elites.
 
Glaucus said:
Anyway, if you ever need to piss of a New Yorker, just tell them you've been there but think Chicago is better. Right Cecilia? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
well, I'm hardly pissed off, but others might be.

I've traveled to various places in America and I have to say that they really all have been quite interesting. from a little town like Texarcana to much larger cities.

To me every place is worth visiting. Not everyplace is worth living in for a long time. Even tho I have done my best work in my career in LA, that place is horrible to live in.

I've visited Chicago often enough to like the place, but frankly I would hate the winters there (which seem to last most of the year).

I could go on, but I should save it for a future travelogue

I really think it's silly to get pissed off because some people won't or can't love your favorite city. it's so complicated why a person loves a place. it's mostly emotional. why argue about that?
 
Palin?

I find it astonishing that anyone can take this person seriously.

Even if I agreed with her repulsive politics, she is a moron. I couldn't vote for someone so obviously thick.

Why are so many people so keen to have imbeciles running the world?

Not that she'd ever be allowed to really control anything anyway, so I guess it's moot.
 
Robert said:
Palin?

I find it astonishing that anyone can take this person seriously.

Even if I agreed with her repulsive politics, she is a moron. I couldn't vote for someone so obviously thick.

Why are so many people so keen to have imbeciles running the world?

Not that she'd ever be allowed to really control anything anyway, so I guess it's moot.
Click to expand...
exactly.

it's amazing people can't spot that she is dumber than dirt.

it would be easy to say that her "fans" are just as stupid as she is, but I feel the situation HAS to be more complicated than that.

there just has to be a reason some people NEED to look up to someone that lame.

but I can't get my head around it because I don't Follow anyone. I don't need a Leader. I just want people to do their jobs so I can be free to do mine.
I just don't think like palin fans
 
cecilia said:
it's amazing people can't spot that she is dumber than dirt.

it would be easy to say that her "fans" are just as stupid as she is, but I feel the situation HAS to be more complicated than that.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt.
Even this very thread demonstrates it's more complicated than that.
 
cecilia wrote:
it's amazing people can't spot that she is dumber than dirt.
--------------------------

Perhaps she went to school in "Texarcana."
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top