Tuesday, January 1, 2013

As the Melodrama Continues...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny



As the nation watches (as well as the world at large) the United States House, led by the rEpublican false conservatives have us serfs standing at the cliff's edge as we look into the abyss.

Perhaps, just maybe, the intransigent false conservatives are running out of time and their true motives are being recognized by the many who heretofore believed them. As more disgruntled past supporters turn their backs on the false conservatives maybe, just maybe they ought to look to history to find the ultimate result of their type of behavior and intransigence. Even a staunch Ayn Rand Objectivist has the ability to see beyond the present as he peers into the future. At least this one does. Echoes of our founding fathers are ringing in my ears as I write this.

Eric Cantor, the intelligent yet blind House Majority leader may very well, and soon find himself the object of ridicule. As difficult as it might be for some to accept the reality is he will have reaped the benefit of his intransigence.

A lifelong conservative/libertarian I have come to the realization that the party of Eisenhower/Goldwater/Reagan has morphed into something most rational and reasonable people now struggle, or even fail to recognize let alone understand. It is indeed unfortunate as the opposition party, the democrat progressives offer little of which one can be entirely hopeful of as well.

So hang on folks, the future ain't too hopeful or bright. All we can hope for is the smoothest ride down and hopefully a not to violent landing. The thing is, most of America won't even recognize, let alone understand they have been scammed. The Oligarchs however will be laughing and licking their chops all the way to the financial institutions and the seats of power they own lock, stock, and barrel.

BuzzFeed Politics - WASHINGTON — Less than 12 hours after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Vice President Joe Biden marshaled a strong 89 votes for their fiscal cliff plan, the agreement appeared on the brink of unraveling at the hands of a House Republican revolt that includes Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

During a closed-door meeting of the GOP conference Tuesday afternoon, Cantor told his colleagues that he would not support the deal — despite the fact that he and Speaker John Boehner the night before had vowed to “consider” the bill.

Although his remarks were brief, they sent shock waves through his conference, which was already extremely skeptical of the agreement, and perhaps looking for a leader.

Conservative opposition to the agreement stems from a host of issues, including the fact that the deal does not include any spending cuts, would significantly add to the nation’s deficit and raises taxes on those making more than $400,000 a year.

And Cantor’s not alone in opposing the deal: the agreement is universally disliked within Republican circles, and even Democrats in the House and Senate have voiced complaints about the deal.

The lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today’s meeting," said Boehner spokesperson Brendan Buck. "Conversations with members will continue throughout the afternoon on the path forward.”

Rep. Steve LaTourette, a Boehner ally, said there were “two schools of thought” expressed in the meeting: To accept the deal and “live to fight another day,” or amend the measure and send it back to the Senate.

The latter option clearly enjoyed support from the majority of the conference.

“I think it’s moving in that direction," LaTourette said.

Still, Cantor’s decision to come out against the agreement was unexpected.{Continue Reading}

It is indeed puzzling that students of political science and history, including economic history have brought us to this point. What is most interesting is it has been the party that should have been the champion of Friedrich A. Hayek that has LED us to record deficits and an unsustainable national debt. Rather than acting like the fiscal conservatives they would have everyone believe they were in fact our nation's biggest spendthrifts. There has never been greater enthusiasts of Keynesian deficit spending economics than the modern rEpublican party.

And folks, that IS a Fact.

Via: Memeorandum

54 comments:

  1. I have never understood why libertarians think the Republican Party is their natural home. I don't know why people who follow Hayek would want anything to do with Republicans.

    I have already given you one quote from Hayek Les, and here is another; "The growth of wealth comes via the accumulation of capital — i.e. ever more productive and mutually coordinated production goods, created by skilled and intelligent workers and entrepreneurs.

    It doesn’t come via the accumulation of debt or via the consumption of the seed corn."

    Milton Friedman was the Republican economic thinker, and Hayek thought he was an idiot or as he said, "Milton Friedman had no capital in his economics, so he believed that paying your way with debt was as good as paying your way with taxes. Somehow even the basic math of compound interest seemed to have escaped his attention."

    The TRUTH is that Hayek believed that supply side economics was nothing more than a very vulgar form of Keynesian economics of one sort or another.

    So, why do you keep attempting to get the Republicans to be what they never were, never claimed to be, and won't ever be?

    Eric Cantor is nothing but a political whore; he's just positioning himself to be speaker of the house and he don't give a damn about the country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The rEpublican party my not be the natural home for libertarians I agree, but then again neither is the democratic party IMNHO. For reasons I shall not belabor here.

      The quotes you have given are certainly not the first time they crossed before my aging eyes. They are however remain as true now as when they first entered my younger consciousness.

      Wealth, has always been the result of productive effort in the pursuit of producing goods that are valued and sought after by society.

      Debt, when manageable and used for the purpose of resulting in ultimate accumulation of something of value (tangible assets such as a home etc.) ultimately exceeding the cost of the original debt note makes perfect sense. Expecting to survive and prosper on somebody else's nickle forever is nothing short of insanity.

      I keep attempting to change the minds of rEpublicans because I know the dEmocratic party with it's flaws is not a home I wish to live in either. That is a subject for another day as well. There are real fiscal conservative/libertarians that think reasonably and rationally that also make up the rEpublican party. I have always enjoyed a fight and my fight today is to attempt, in a admittedly very small way to bring some sanity back to a once proud and EFFECTIVE party.

      So tao, you continue to pursue your efforts for change and I shall continue to pursue mine. Each in our own way and at the same time for the same ultimate results, albeit by somewhat different paths and methods.

      Fair enough my friend?

      Delete
    2. "Wealth, has always been the result of productive effort in the pursuit of producing goods that are valued and sought after by society."

      That is the single most naive thing I've ever read on a blog. I can't believe, Les, that you actually wrote that.

      JMJ

      Delete
    3. Read it on the proper context , I realize this is challenging for you but give it a try.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, yeah, but in and of itself, it's a telling comment, regardless of the context. On top of that, it makes that equally naive assumption that government debt, or entitlements in particular, do nothing to create wealth, and that, in and of itself, is simply not true, though there the context would matter a lot more.

      JMJ

      Delete
    5. As you wish... Naive, whatever.

      I'll concede that like all progressives that follow only the party line you are as intransigent and as much a part of the problem as your intransigent cousins on the opposite side of the road. Like all rabid progressives you are never wrong about anything, it is always the progressive way or the highway. Perhaps that is part of the problem.

      I have grown to recognize more and more the value of compromise, however, I will not be bludgeoned (rhetorically speaking) into accepting those parts of the progressive agenda that is nothing more than blather, babble,and hopeful wishing while ignoring reality. There are as many "good" conservatives as there are "good" liberals, when THEY work together things can and do get accomplished. Your type of progressive, and your alter ego's on the right are the elements that need to be fought. To the bitter end if necessary.

      So, as I said, whatever jmj, whatever...

      Delete
    6. The misbegotten belief that the creation of wealth always represents productive behavior is what got us into a lot of trouble over the years. It's the reason why when people like yourself refer to the "productive" classes, people like me dismiss it as either deceptive or again, naive.

      I know you're trying to convince Republicans in this post, but if you were trying to convince Democrats and more liberal people, you'd have to realize that the creation and maintenance of wealth does not in and of itself represent productivity, or even anything remotely positive, good, or just.

      As long as conservatives turn a blind eye to this reality, you will never convince anyone else to take them seriously for elected office.

      JMJ

      Delete
  2. If you would expand your reading to the Ottoman Empire and or the Mughal Empire you would find lots of parallels to our Empire.

    The Ottoman Empire lasted 600 years and if it could have gone another 40 years it would have been by far the most powerful and wealthiest empire in the history of mankind because it would have controlled all the oil in the middle east except that of Iran.

    It just couldn't make it, because everyone was out for themselves and enriching their groups with no thought whatsoever about the whole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Tao it had been many years, and I have no doubt forgotten much, but I was a history major and my strength at the time was world history. The Ottoman Empire always intrigued me.

      All I will say is simply this, and I mean every word and always have... They did not understand the meaning of acting in ones own long term self interest.

      Nor do the rEbublicans.

      Delete
    2. tao,

      "...because everyone was out for themselves and enriching their groups with no thought whatsoever about the whole."

      Yikes. Sounds like the Democrat Party, identity politics, class warfare, and social-engineering, all wrapped up in one happy burrito.

      Delete
  3. "Any State that does not include the worth, value of man, will not succeed."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your accentuating the obvious. Of course you are referring to those who are productive or in the process of education that leads to them being productive. Right Anon?

      Delete
    2. Wasn't talking about individuals. No surprise you cannot read

      Delete
    3. No. You sound like the nightmare of Orwell's 1984. Work production is not the complete value of man. It's not even the most important trait.

      Delete
  4. Well, the House just passed the Bill that temporarily avoids the fiscal cliff. Something most knew would happen, as Congress kicks the can down the road.

    Lets now expect our elected lawmakers to ACTUALLY do what we pay then to do, make decisions that will actually set our feet on the road to fiscal sanity and stability.

    Not holding my breath give current moods of both parties.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hate agreeing with Borsch but he is correct in a sense that too many use the party apparatus to enrich or enhance themselves.

    If they use it to advance the ideals of the party I have no problem. Les is also correct. Cantor has no interest in advancing fiscal responsibily or anything else the republicans are supposed to be for. He only wants the speakership and telling tea party kooks and their ilk whatever crap they want to hear is his plan to get it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paul Ryan, the guy with the big plan that involved lowering taxes, the Ayn Rand Austrian School conservative, the top ideologue of the right, just voted AYE for tax increases.

      Delete
    2. Spending cuts, real ones, will be at the top of his list going forward past the can kicking melodrama just witnessed. The stage had been set.

      Delete
    3. The reality is that now with the tax rates fixed the issue of spending cuts will also include further revenue enhancements (tax reform, closing loopholes, changes to corporate income taxes and such).

      Using the debt ceiling for leverage has also been negated.

      That is the reality the right finds themselves in this morning.

      But it will reduce the deficit significantly. So in the end it will be a balanced approached to achieve a cherished goal.

      Why do I suspect that no one on the right will be happy?

      Delete
  6. The Democrat party is an even worse fit for libertarians. Democrats and Republicans are two arms of statism.

    I have read Hayek extensively, studied him, and the Democrats in no way Hayekian. The follow none of his prescriptions. In fact, the progressives of both parties have done just what he warned us against in Constitution of Liberty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a voting Republican what have you learned from the policies of your party, as those policies have been implemented over the last 30 years?

      Delete
  7. Since we're talking history, a better example is Argentina. We are repeating that country's mistakes, and will eventually meet their fate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. My friends, please consider this for a moment or two:

    Remember that Socialist bogeyman that President Reagan warned us about in the 80's? Well, guess what? He's here. He has arrived. Nothing about the last 4 years has shown otherwise.

    We continue to look to the future for America's struggle against Socialism, as if it will happen later to a different generation, and will by-pass us. But I would submit that it is here. Now. Today.

    We deserve what we tolerate.

    Long Live the Republic. The enemy is not at the gates; the enemy has already set up house.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay, I considered it for "a moment" and I have to ask, Socialism?

      I mean really, a state where the workers control the means of production?

      Last I checked the workers didn't control jack shit.

      With all the talk about "...how will the markets react to the fiscal cliff..." and with the big bounce in the markets this morning I think we all realize that our true master is "the markets."

      Give up on the stupid talk about socialism. You got a welfare state because of supply side capitalism; you got what Ronald Reagan aspired to not what he was fighting against.



      Delete
    2. Don, I understand your concern, but Socialism came to America before either of us were even thought of.

      FDR and social security, socialism in its infancy

      LBJ and the great society that brought us medicare and medicaid (I was here by that time)

      The seed of which you speak of has been germinating by far longer, and goes back further than FDR, and whether most want to recognize or admit it, the dEmocrats and the rEpublicans have shared in the long march towards socialism. Unfortunately it is true the road the so called conservative rEpublicans would have us continue on, (the spendthrift Keynesians that they are) will result in more of what you (and I) as well as others are fighting so hard to prevent.

      Obama is not that bogeyman so many on the right fear. Rather he is merely a further extension of that which has been occurring going back to Teddy Roosevelt. History will be the ultimate judge of his Presidency. And the ultimate effectiveness or lack thereof. Let us not forget America spoke on November 6th exactly as the founders intended.

      We have a dEmocratic President, a dEmocratic Senate, and perhaps most importantly a rEpublican house. This requires compromise and a shared responsibility to govern. Starting now we should begin judging the results of the Obama administration going forward for the next 8 years, if you catch my point.

      Delete
    3. Les,

      I appreciate your words. Tis true, Socialism has already arrived via FDR. You are correct. I was referring to President Obama and his ilk in the frame of happening in my personal lifetime. FDR kinda happened before I came onto the scene! :)

      You say we have a rEpublican House, a dEmocrat Senate and President. True enough. But I do not believe for one second that there will be any kind of compromise, provided it is not what the Socialist Dems want. Your belief and optimism that we will have a shared responsibility to govern is, in my opinion, woefully ignorant. Not that you are ignorant, Les, no. I simply believe your belief in this issue is ignorant. I know you are hoping for the best, but those days for me are over. There is no best coming. There is only the cold reality of a liberal takeover. I do not say this to you in the spirit of contention, or in seeking to alienate the two of us from one another. It is merely how I see things.

      I disagree with you that President Obama is not that bogeyman that President Reagan warned us about. He was selected and groomed for such position by a guilt-ridden liberal system and with the total assistance of an agenda-driven old media machine.

      Les, it is difficult for me to say such things to you, so please understand the tone of my voice here. I disagree with you and I believe your hoping for a better future is misplaced. But I know we are on the same team, so to speak, and I am hoping this will not be a wedge between us.

      I do not see the future as being better. I see it as being horrific.

      Respectfully, Donald

      Delete
    4. "I believe your hoping for a better future is misplaced. But I know we are on the same team, so to speak, and I am hoping this will not be a wedge between us.

      I do not see the future as being better. I see it as being horrific."

      I have a vision that a better brighter future is possible, although it will be a difficult road to travel unless America finds a way to create that brighter future TOGETHER. Hope alone, irrespective of what Obama's 2008 campaign stickers implied, will NOT get the job done.

      Yes we are on the same team, the team to rationally, responsibly, and reasonably find the compromises that lead to a better tomorrow. Certainly we need spending cuts, we need to close tax loopholes, we need to restructure the antiquated tax code, we need to foster self reliance, education, a stronger work ethic, and on and on. We also need to break free from the Oligarchs that are the bogeymen we should all fear.

      If the architects of this nation were able to craft a road map to building a nation through compromise we sure as hell ought to honor their efforts by doing nothing less. Irrespective of what some (uber-progressives) might say in regards to our Constitution.

      Delete
    5. Americans see a bleak future. Shortly after I typed my words to you, this came up on Yahoo!, and I was intrigued. Again, your optimism is to your credit, Les, but...not many of us agree with you. I'd like to. I'd like to see a silver lining. But nothing in these last 4 years has shown me this is realistic.

      The electorate has spoken. They want government-dependency and the gradual dismantling of our Constitution. You simply cannot overcome Santa Obama.

      http://www.perigonmedia.com/poll-shows-majority-of-americans-see-a-bleak-future/

      Delete
  9. "Last I checked the workers didn't control jack shit."

    The unionized ones sure got a sweet deal out of Emperor Obama in the auto bailout.

    To finish the taxpayer screwing, he is selling the GM stock for half of what he paid for it. One more example of why the federal government has no business participating the market. It is too stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ιts like you leаrn mу thoughts! You appeaг
    to know а lot about this, liκe уou wrote the
    boοk in it or somethіng. I feel that you sіmрlу could dο
    ωіth some percent to drive thе mesѕage
    hоmе a bit, but instead of thаt, that is excellent blog.
    A great read. I will ԁefinitеly be back.
    Here is my homepage tzmpolska.org

    ReplyDelete
  11. tao,

    "Okay, I considered it for "a moment" and I have to ask, Socialism?

    I mean really, a state where the workers control the means of production?

    Last I checked the workers didn't control jack sh*t."

    Socialism, wherein the State gives and takes whatever it wants from the common class, while maintaining a ruling class of elites and State supporters who have money. That is our America in 2013.

    To believe otherwise is ignorant. To deny what you see is only stupidity defined.

    Socialism is here. Your president is manifesting it. Class warfare is the beginning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don, keep this up with TAO and perhaps you will sooner or later get an UN-honorable mention on his site. Nothing like good publicity for the cause, right? ;-)

      Delete
    2. Les,

      tao is a male? I thought for sure tao was a woman. Huh. Learn something new each day.

      I've read her, sorry, his stuff. And people call us 'extremists'. Yeesh.

      Delete
    3. Yep, from what I understand he's a big dude, like in 6'5" or something like that. Think he owns his own company, or at least h did.

      I think he used to lean republican, now his goal is to corrupt conservative, at least it used to be HS goal a couple or three years ago. Joe calls him his big brother, or he used to.

      Have fun engaging him, but come equipped with lots verifiable data. He does. Oh, and he is a "different kind" of progressive, he does not fit "mold" if you will.

      Delete
  12. @ taospeaks... "Last I checked the workers didn't control jack shit."

    In fact workers do control a bit. Having actually managed both union and non union shops I understand the meaning of "contract" and "employee handbooks." Of course companies have the right to set reasonable rules and expectations for their employees comply as they well should. But it is naive, or foolish to sell the idea they don't control "jack shit." A d they can, and in some cases have brought companies to their knees. Understand though I am not saying or implying this is the general rule. Bjt, you blamket statement was a bit of an overreach IMNHO...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Les,

      It's only an overreach if it doesn't happen. And it is happening. You, of all people, should see it all around you.

      Please prove me wrong. Please show me that I am imagining things. Please reveal to me the government you see, because I must be looking at a completely different one.

      Delete
    2. As I keep saying Don it has been happening all around us for a long time. The key is to recognize how to correct the problem. I wish it were as simple as just blaming socialism, but it isn't. There are some issues the right needs to deal with and then offer solutions people will buy into. The politicians that might be able to restore faith in fiscal conservatism (I've posted on them) likely have little to no chance in the present rEpublican party at the national level. Simply put in the political sense conservatives have been their own worst enemy. But I don't expect you or most to understand what I'm saying.

      "Seek first to understand, then to be understood" Steven Covey I think. After this is accomplished then provide solutions, and, expect to compromise.

      We are on the same team. We are Americans.

      Delete
    3. Les,

      "We are Americans."

      Divided Americans. This Nation is so split by rhetoric and agendas it is no longer united. There are the achievers and the dependents. The dependents won.

      This is The New America, Les. People like us are now being targeted. Like I said, I see a horrific future for America. It is not going to be comfortable or pretty.

      Delete
    4. Yes, you are right. This nation is split by rhetoric and agendas, badly in fact. Sadly the factions have become so entrenched in their own rhetoric and agenda they fail to see it in themselves.

      I have been guilty of this as well on occasion. But in reality if everyone stays this course the divisions will only become wider and deeper. I sense more and more each day that heels are being dug deeper and deeper, at least with respect to the most partisan on both sides.

      I'm actually glad I am as old as I am. If I'm lucky I'll be gone before the nation I knew disappears.

      Delete
  13. So the old saying, "During high unemployment and recession, nobody's job is safe" is wrong?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who said it was wrong? And it affects everyone, even supervosors, managers, and sometimes executives.

      Delete
    2. During hard times we Americans need to stick together. We're not alone anymore. We have no post-war Europe and Asia to suck off any more. They've been sucking back for years now.

      We have to find a way to get back to the Founders vision - a country that got and get along with each other and made sure first and foremost of that equilibrium. Agreeing to disagree. For example, respecting other states when it comes to full rights.

      I say you righties are being more abusive of that calling than we lefties. What are we asking of you here?

      We'll be here for you, so why won't you be there for us?

      JMJ

      Delete
    3. I say you're full of shit jmj, and your most definitely are bat shit crazy. So, why not go fly away to your bat shit cave and hang upside down for a couple hundred years or so.

      Delete
    4. JMJ,

      "I say you righties are being more abusive of that calling than we lefties. What are we asking of you here?"

      Oh, the ignorance you have displayed here is staggering. Please to enjoy- the tolerant left:

      http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2010/03/30/violent_liberal_hate_rhetoric_fifteen_quotes/page/full/

      Shall I also link to images from the left, their protest signs, their Occupy hatred, etc, etc. Or how about the TEA Party, with their images of elderly women sitting in lawnchairs, wearing oversized sunglasses and their husbands of the Brooks Brothers Brigade? Yes, so much hatred there!

      JMJ, you continue to amaze me with your ignorance and sheer stupidity. Just when I think you are about to say something sensible, salient, and relevant, you drone on about liberalism and its jackassery as its biggest defender. LOL!

      Delete
  14. This was borderline extortion. The President knew that he had the Republicans by the gonads and the end result was a bill that $620 billion in tax increases (over 10 years) and $15 billion in spending cuts. The Republicans probably should have done what Rand Paul suggested and simply voted, "present". What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well guys, it's 3 eleven in the morning on January 3, and America is still not a socialist state. Don't fret, though... we'll get there... when you psychotic libertarians and conservatives one day have your way. (I mean, what better a workforce than dependent peasants? Right? That's what you guys want, right?)

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JMJ... Proving yet once again that jackassery is indeed alive and well on America. It's called progressivism.

      Delete
  16. Good day! I know this is kinda off topic however , I'd figured I'd ask.
    Would you be interested in trading links or
    maybe guest writing a blog article or vice-versa?
    My website addresses a lot of the same topics as yours
    and I feel we could greatly benefit from each other.
    If you happen to be interested feel free to shoot me an email.
    I look forward to hearing from you! Superb blog by the way!
    Review my site ; how to lose weight quick

    ReplyDelete
  17. Les,

    On a related note, what is your take on the Sandy Relief Bill that isn't? Do you think that Speaker Boehner is wrong in not passing it in its original form? 27 Billion needed for Sandy Relief, but 60 Billion asked for.

    http://www.perigonmedia.com/the-sandy-relief-bill-that-isnt-about-sandy-at-all/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have not been able to get all the data available on this as of yet. So my res[ponse is based on a limited amount of information.

      1) I am, as I am sure Boehner is as well, 100% behind the relief funds of 27 billion. The people so severely affect by this natural disaster shoould be helped.

      2) Attaching pork to legitimate funding bills to get somebody's pet project funded is as old as the hills and both parties do it. All the time. My position is, and has always been each bill should be submitted as a lkne item and voted on independently of ANY OTHER considerations.

      3) As I perused your write up I noticed a couple of things that might, and I say might, warrant consideration along with this bill. Tere are items that have no business being attached to this bill. However, as I said both parties do it all the time and it is done for PURELY POLITICAL reasons. I won't go into detail because everyone understands this. Even the ones employing the tactic.

      4) No Boehner is not wrong in a objective and rational sense. However, given how American dirty politics work he knew what was coming down the pike, or at least he should have. rEpublicans and Boehner have played at this game long enough themselves. The dEmocrats set the rEpublicans up, and the rEpublicans took the bait.

      Now we see what we see. However, again, it is no more or less disgraceful than when rEpublicans do the same.

      My quick two cents worth.

      Delete
    2. Les,

      A nicely said set of two cents. We agree on all points, specifically #2. I understand this kind of tactic is employed all the time by both sides. Definitely. But damn, Les....why do we tolerate it as the norm? Why do we tolerate it and expect it as the ones who will pay for it all?

      I know you are an atheist, but perhaps you would consider praying with me for my God to remove all morons and idiots from our federal government and give us sensible, solid, Constitutionally-adept, independent, and fiscally-aware elected officials. We've seen what we get when we don't have these people representing us. It's time for a real change. :)

      I am taking notes on this whole ordeal to use later on against those who voted for this non-relief bill. Names have been taken, indeed.

      Delete
  18. The usage of "Democrat" instead of Democratic by Republicans really aggravates me still. On the level of politics, Republicans believe they make some kind of puerile point by stomping their feet and never ever ever saying "Democratic" even though the rules of language require it and it happens to be the name of the party.

    It's something like insisting that Barbara Walters be called Barbara Wawa every time her name comes up. She wouldn't like it and when this stupid Republican insult gets repeated, unwittingly or not, we don't like it either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,

      When you can show any of us how the Democrats exemplify true democracy, ie The Voice Of The Majority Will (and not the rule of elitism: You need to sign it to find out what's in it and how none of us were asked if we wanted the failed Stimulus), then I will happily refer to y'all as Democratic. Until such time, however, you are, and shall be, merely Democrats and Socialists.

      Well, in this fella's mind, anyhoos. I surely cannot speak for anyone else but myself.

      Please feel free to malign the GOP or the Republicans in retaliation, since I am neither, and would probably join you in doing so. Cheers, mate.

      Delete
    2. Lee, would it make you feel better if this site begins to refer to republicans as the republic party?

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.



LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails