GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 4

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
As an American, I believe that we should give equal treatment to people from all faiths and religious backgrounds, even if their faith is a 200 years-recent add-on expansion pack for Christianity that came on a charming set of magical golden plates.
 
what i love about Mormonism is that it's really no more ridiculous than any other religion. it delights me when people try to point out how made up it sounds, like it's no different than any other snake oil that was sold to Americans in the 19th century. and it really does sound that way. but, hey, so are immaculate conceptions and parting seas and flying up to heaven.

and also because it doesn't really matter. if people believe it, it becomes true for them. and if it helps them to be better people then they are better for it.
 
New York Times, April 13
As he works to energize the conservative base ahead of the general election, Mitt Romney came to the annual gathering of the National Rifle Association on Friday seeking support from a powerful group that has not always embraced him. His backing while Massachusetts governor of key laws opposed by the national gun lobby--an assault weapons ban and a waiting period to buy firearms--has engendered skepticism, if not hostility, among many gun owners.

But in the speech he delivered here, Mr. Romney breezed past those issues to touch a more fundamental nerve: the gun lobby’s fear that a second term for President Obama would give him another Supreme Court appointee. The 4.3-million-member gun group fears that a remade court could lead to restrictions on firearms. “In his first term,” Mr. Romney’s said, “we’ve seen the president try to browbeat the Supreme Court. In a second term, he would remake it. Our freedoms would be in the hands of an Obama court, not just for four years, but for the next 40. That must not happen.’’ Before Mr. Romney spoke, a spokesman for the gun lobby, Andrew Arulanandam, said it was looking for exactly this kind of statement. Mr. Arulanandam said that the biggest fear of NRA members was that an altered Supreme Court might reverse two 5-to-4 rulings since 2008 interpreting the Second Amendment as guaranteeing a fundamental right to individuals to bear arms. The most recent ruling, the McDonald case in 2010, is seen as opening the way for challenges to local laws restricting gun ownership.

Another goal for Mr. Romney here is to close some of the cultural gap with gun owners. He was lampooned during his 2008 run for the Republican nomination for exaggerating his hunting career, at one point, when pressed, saying that the game he had experience with were rodents and rabbits, “small varmints, if you will.’’ More recently, Mr. Romney revealed that he owned a couple of firearms, and in a debate in January he described a hunting trip to Montana. His guide on that outing was a respected sportsman, Rob Keck, who in an interview described taking Mr. Romney for two days of hunting elk and for one shooting pheasants on a private ranch. “He admittedly didn’t grow up hunting,’’ Mr. Keck said, “but let me tell you, he accounted for a number of birds on that day.’’ So it was probably no surprise that Mr. Romney has been accompanied here by Mr. Keck, the director of conservation for Bass Pro Shops.

It remains to be seen whether hunters who view gun rights as a top issue will enthusiastically support Mr. Romney in November. David Ross, a longtime NRA member from Reading, PA, who has been a grass-roots organizer for conservative candidates in his battleground state, was skeptical. “Romney needs to get people like me passionate enough for his campaign to win in November, and I think that’s going to be heavy lifting,’’ said Mr. Ross, who was attending the convention with his son, Clinton, an Army reservist. “He was for an assault weapons ban when he was Massachusetts governor. What changed? And how do we know he’s not going to change back? This is the chameleonlike thinking that is my biggest fear.’’
 
Obama Bucks - YouTube

“I think it’s really simple. It’s because government’s now telling them ‘stop dreaming, stop striving, we’ll take care of you.’ We’re turning into a paternalistic entitlement society.”

That will not just bankrupt us financially, it will bankrupt us morally because when the American people no longer believe that this a place where only their willingness to work hard and to act with honor and integrity and ingenuity determines their success in life then we’ll have a bunch of people sittin’ on a couch waiting for their next government check Obama Bucks.”
--Chris Christie April 2012
 
^What a load of crap.

Does what Obama actually says matter at all, or are you just content to make it all up?
 
INDY500 said:
“I think it’s really simple. It’s because government’s now telling them ‘stop dreaming, stop striving, we’ll take care of you.’ We’re turning into a paternalistic entitlement society.”

“That will not just bankrupt us financially, it will bankrupt us morally because when the American people no longer believe that this a place where only their willingness to work hard and to act with honor and integrity and ingenuity determines their success in life then we’ll have a bunch of people sittin’ on a couch waiting for their next government check Obama Bucks.”
--Chris Christie April 2012

See what I'm talking about Garrison?

Complete shit, and I dare any intelligent individual to defend this.
 
The truth of this matter is that those benefits are temporary and not eternal.

Why do they always put blacks as the typical lazy stereotype on things like this?
 
Wow, it's like they tailor-made a clip to support Indy's viewpoints.

Must be nice to ignore all the white families receiving unemployment benefits. Drive around Michigan sometime and you'll see Whitey getting his Obama Bucks as well, in order to feed his two children in his 20,000 $ home.
 
*Raises hand as one of those white people whose family has collected unemployment/food stamps/government aid before*

I also love the insinuation that if one gets unemployment or other government aid that all they do is sit around on their ass and enjoy it. I really, REALLY wish the Chris Christies of the world could come talk to my family once. Please. I beg of you. My parents have been unemployed before, and guess what? They...GASP...went out and looked for more jobs! Any job, didn't matter what it was or how much it paid. Part-time, full-time, minimum wage, whatever, they took anything they could get and sometimes worked two jobs to try and keep us afloat. They HATED having to rely on food stamps. They only asked for help when they felt there was absolutely NO OTHER OPTION AVAILABLE. And even then, they still had too much pride in them, they found the situation embarrassing and wanted to fix it as soon as possible. And when things started looking up again financially, they didn't keep on with the government aid, they let it go.

I know this sort of story flies in the face of some people's preconceived notions about the "poor" and "lower class" in society, but call me crazy, I'm a fan of facts and reality, and I think it's way past time for those things to start factoring into a conversation. See, this is part of why people have a problem with the GOP. How much more fucking patronizing and insulting can one get?

And I won't even start on the bullshit NRA/gun lobby "Obama will take away our guns" crap. Love that people that paranoid and delusional are the ones advocating expansion of gun usage. So comforting.
 
The truth of this matter is that those benefits are temporary and not eternal.

Why do they always put blacks as the typical lazy stereotype on things like this?

Wow, it's like they tailor-made a clip to support Indy's viewpoints.

Must be nice to ignore all the white families receiving unemployment benefits. Drive around Michigan sometime and you'll see Whitey getting his Obama Bucks as well, in order to feed his two children in his 20,000 $ home.

You know who made that video, right? It was Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of Nancy Pelosi, and it originally aired on Bill Maher over a month ago. They also had a video of racist, toothless white rednecks in Mississippi who refused to take handouts from the govt / Obama "cuz he's black" or whatever. So there you go..

While the benefits are often temporary, and definitely needed by many, what this video illustrates is that there are far too many people who really are abusing the system.

As one of the 51% of Americans who works hard and pays taxes, why should i continue to support the people who are freeloading off of the system? You can take Obama out of the equation even, because this has been going on long before he was POTUS, and will continue to do so long after he's done. I'd like to see the people who honestly need help get help, its the Christian thing to do, but the people in this video dont need my support to buy their cans of bud and be "single - ready to mingle"
 
As one of the 51% of Americans who works hard and pays taxes, why should i continue to support the people who are freeloading off of the system?

Why do you keep repeating something that is patently false? The remaining 49% pay federal payroll and excise tax, state and local sales, income and property taxes.
 
You know who made that video, right? It was Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of Nancy Pelosi, and it originally aired on Bill Maher over a month ago. They also had a video of racist, toothless white rednecks in Mississippi who refused to take handouts from the govt / Obama "cuz he's black" or whatever. So there you go..
There you go what? What does that prove?
You can take Obama out of the equation even, because this has been going on long before he was POTUS, and will continue to do so long after he's done.
But why does this point seem to get completely lost in today's narrative?
 
^What a load of crap.

Does what Obama actually says matter at all, or are you just content to make it all up?
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE !! YOU COULD MAKE THE SAME VIDEO INTERVIEWING PEOPLE OF ANY SKIN COLOR IN ANY CITY IN THE COUNTRY.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's a reason I put in bold “That will not just bankrupt us financially, it will bankrupt us morally." Because that is exactly what is happening.

As Newt Gingrich said in the campaign, "these programs aren't safety nets they're spider webs" that trap people in dependency, keeps them in poverty and at the bottom and deprives them of the dignity of a job.

As I've said, it's not just the loss of monetary capital its the loss of human capital these programs bring on.
 
As Newt Gingrich said in the campaign, "these programs aren't safety nets they're spider webs" that trap people in dependency, keeps them in poverty and at the bottom and deprives them of the dignity of a job.

But where is the solution? Newt didn't have one(well except repealing child labor laws), the GOP didn't have one, the Dems don't have one. These safety nets alone are the not the problem. The ability to so easilily abuse them is the problem, but it's only a problem for some. But these programs have very little to do with the problem of keeping people in the cycle of poverty. That problem is contributed to a flaw in the entire system, yes the one you find flawless. Pure and unregulated capitalism.
 
As Newt Gingrich said in the campaign, "these programs aren't safety nets they're spider webs" that trap people in dependency, keeps them in poverty and at the bottom and deprives them of the dignity of a job.

And of course Gingrich would clearly know what we are going through, right? When I look for a relatable candidate who understands the problems people like myself deal with, I look to Newt Gingrich.

As BVS said, they can bitch about this stuff all they want, but they don't offer any viable solutions to the problems. And the safety nets (or "spider webs", or whatever you want to call them) exist because of bigger problems, problems that the Republicans seem to want no part of rectifying.
 
the system is broken. you have to go in a completely different direction

Ron Paul, could be the best,
well at least the best, of the options available.
 
As Newt Gingrich said in the campaign, "these programs aren't safety nets they're spider webs" that trap people in dependency, keeps them in poverty and at the bottom and deprives them of the dignity of a job.


these are a series of phrases that are in no way connected to each other.

i thought we left the debunked "welfare queen" stereotypes back in the 1980s? or at least with welfare reform in the 1990s?

the amount of people who actually use the safety nets in the way that they were intended to be used dwarfs the small amount of people who abuse them. of course we want things to work better, but this is quite different than going back to the brutal pre-great society era where the elderly died alone and in poverty and children starved in Appalachia.

it shocks me that we're thrilled to drop bombs on Tehran but the idea that a black woman with two kids living in New Orleans who gets $250 a month from the government is somehow indicative of moral decay.

what's consumes 3/4ths of GDP is the following: defense, social security, medicare and medicaid.

please, tell me, which of these programs are "spider webs" that trap people into cycles of dependency?

and let me know what in defense you want to cut. because a serious conversation begins there.
 
What politician honestly fits that bill though?

Barack Obama? Mitt Romney?

Well, given the childhood Obama had, single mother and whatnot, I get the feeling he'd at least empathize with people struggling better than some other politicians would. Romney or Gingrich have not had to want for much in their lives financially.

I'm also targeting the Republicans because of the thread we are in, too. As I've said before, the Democrats aren't perfect on these issues, either, and in threads related to them, I'd be happy to discuss their shortcomings there as well.

it shocks me that we're thrilled to drop bombs on Tehran but the idea that a black woman with two kids living in New Orleans who gets $250 a month from the government is somehow indicative of moral decay.

:up:

And to further your Tehran comment, I also love how, if the U.S. government "helps" people here at all, it's evil socialism encroaching upon everyone*. But the U.S. government "helping" people in other countries? Well, that's just good ol' democracy being spread around.

*Unless the U.S. government is telling its citizens who they can and can't be allowed to marry or telling people they're not allowed to serve openly in the military or telling women what to do with their bodies. Then it's okay for the government to get involved in people's lives.
 
The drastic solution is to completely eliminate all kinds of unemployment benefits, healthcare benefits and anything that is associated with receiving aid from the government.

Third-world style, spread the wealth but keep it in safe places.
 
The drastic solution is to completely eliminate all kinds of unemployment benefits, healthcare benefits and anything that is associated with receiving aid from the government.

Third-world style, spread the wealth but keep it in safe places.
Yeah, I am trying to figure out if Indy is advocating a Shah-gets-all-the-oil-money model of plutocracy.
 
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE !! YOU COULD MAKE THE SAME VIDEO INTERVIEWING PEOPLE OF ANY SKIN COLOR IN ANY CITY IN THE COUNTRY.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's a reason I put in bold “That will not just bankrupt us financially, it will bankrupt us morally." Because that is exactly what is happening.

As Newt Gingrich said in the campaign, "these programs aren't safety nets they're spider webs" that trap people in dependency, keeps them in poverty and at the bottom and deprives them of the dignity of a job.

As I've said, it's not just the loss of monetary capital its the loss of human capital these programs bring on.

Race wasn't even on my mind I was referring to the quote not the video. (I was on my phone and the video didn't show up so I didn't even know it was there). My issue is with making up absurd stances/attitudes and attributing them to Obama.

As for the video, I'll have to watch it and then consider whether to add racism to my outrage. .. :wink:
 
C'mon, everyone. It's so simple. Work hard, pull yourself up by your bootstraps and you will be rich. Just work hard and you'll make it, you guys.
 
let me put this in a way that perhaps people here could understand, i am an able bodied veteran who enjoys the challenges of my career. However, if i suddenly quit my job on monday because i didnt want to work, would you guys object to the govt paying my mortgage, car payments, food, health care, and providing me with beer money? Also, i wont be drug tested because that's too expensive, unlike the govt benefits.
 
Simply not wanting to work is different from not being ABLE to work. Of course I object to people getting free handouts who are physically capable of working and not doing so simply because they just don't want to.

But hey, let me give you a scenario in return: My dad had health issues off and on throughout the previous years, but still worked his butt off at every job he did have-he worked in radio, and given the state of radio nowadays, he found himself having to move from station to station quite often in that business in recent years. In 2009 we moved to South Dakota because someone hired him for a job there (he was still working at the job he'd had previously, but things were looking shaky on him staying there much longer, so he went looking around for other options just to be on the safe side). The job paid well, he had a pretty good health insurance plan through his job, things looked okay.

He started the job in October of that year. At the end of November, he lost that job for vague reasons, but my family suspects it was because he was becoming deathly ill at that time. He still went to work every single day up to the day he got let go, but realistically, it probably wasn't wise for him, because he was getting very, very sick.

By December he physically could not get up. He'd gone so far downhill that he could not even sit up, let alone do anything else (and I do mean anything). He had to wind up going into the hospital on a regular basis, and his insurance eventually ran out and he couldn't use it anymore, since he didn't work there anymore.

My mom, despite her years of work in retail and office jobs and experience, could only manage to find a part-time job at Target paying the basic minimum wage. I looked for work, too, but couldn't find anything, and it was a tough choice, because while me working would have definitely helped us, at the same time, when my mom was at work, since we couldn't afford in home care, someone had to be home to take care of my dad, who, once again, could not physically move. We literally could barely pay rent and food, let alone my dad's accumulating medical bills (for which we eventually had to look into Medicare to help us in that regard), and the cheap car we had kept breaking down, which made it very, very difficult when my dad needed to be taken the 2 hours south to Sioux Falls for his treatments since the hospital in our town wasn't as equipped to take care of him as the one in Sioux Falls was (and even when it was working, my mom needed it to get to work, and she often could not go down to Sioux Falls with my dad because she needed to be here to work so she could get paid so we could have a roof over our heads. So my dad kept having to go by ambulance, and the cost for that trip alone adds up). We didn't have furniture in our apartment-we rented a couch when we first moved in and had planned to get more furniture down the line, but again, broke. Couldn't get it.

Oh, and all our attempts to take care of things were for naught, 'cause my dad eventually passed away in April of the following year.

Now, would anyone complain about us getting aid during that time period?

Edited to add: I also find it strange that a veteran has issues with the government helping people out. Um...
 
M_Angel, im very sorry about your dad, and God Bless you all for doing everything you did / and could during such terrible times. I have absolutely no problem with you or anyone like you receiving assistance or aid given your situation, an honest to goodness sincere need for the programs that were put into place if i have ever heard of one. Obviously there are many other people out there with situations similar to yours...these are prime examples of why these programs exist.

Personally i have had to draw unemployment once myself, when the company i worked for lost its contract with GM back in 2001, and closed its doors and laid off all 150+ workers. I was on the unemployment for a couple of months in fact, while vigorously looking for work in the meantime, and finally got a job around 911 as the benefits were about to dry up. I get that people need the assistance, as did i, and im all for these programs helping those in need.

As a veteran, im for helping anyone who truly *needs* it. That said, thinking back to that video posted by Indy500 and myself, those people in the video didn't seemed all too interested in finding a job....they just wanted the "Obama bucks". I think there is a difference. I dont know how you tell the difference between who is for real and who is a bullshit artist with an entitlement mentality....but that is what needs to be fixed imho. One guy in the video made a reference to his ancestors being slaves...as if that's why he was entitled to his "Obama bucks". Well guess what, my ancestors were native americans, but you don't see me dressing up in feathers and running around looking for handouts because i don't want to work.

Im also for govt stepping back a bit and letting free enterprise and the markets work a bit too. At some point this has to happen if we ever want to get above 8.2% unemployment or whatever this current figure is.

But please dont think i have an "(R)" next to my name or that i want to bomb Tehran just because im outraged when my tax dollars go to people i dont feel are worthy of govt assistance. Serving in the military often means getting paid very little to put your life on the line even if you dont necessarily believe in what you are fighting for. If anything, being a veteran and having had to rely on unemployment compensation gives me the unique perspective that i dont ever want to have to rely on any of that shit again.
 
My issue is with making up absurd stances/attitudes and attributing them to Obama.

I only was using the language of those in the video.

I'm currently reading a book called Coming Apart: The State of White America 1960-2010. The author Charles Murray chose to remove race from the study precisely because it then takes over the discussion.
He details the collapse of the institutions of family, society, work and religion among the poor and how that contributes to the growing inequality in our country. While hardly the only factor, the perverse incentives in many of the Great Society programs are the largest.

The numbers are shocking and sadly are worse among black Americans.
 
I thought we left the debunked "welfare queen" stereotypes back in the 1980's? or at least with welfare reform in the 1990's?
And what of the stereotype that anyone wishing to reform or restore fiscal sanity to an entitlement program "hates" the poor or sick or women or whatever? Would you like some quotes from the Welfare Reform debates of the 90's?
the amount of people who actually use the safety nets in the way that they were intended to be used dwarfs the small amount of people who abuse them. of course we want things to work better, but this is quite different than going back to the brutal pre-great society era where the elderly died alone and in poverty and children starved in Appalachia.
Again, too bad a reasonable discussion of the issue is impossible in today's polemic environment.

what's consumes 3/4ths of GDP is the following: defense, social security, medicare and medicaid.
3/4ths of government spending you mean? Which ones are driving the debt today? In 10 years? In 50 years? And in the future you can add another expenditure... interest on the debt. Who benefits from that spending?
please, tell me, which of these programs are "spider webs" that trap people into cycles of dependency?
They all have different challenges. Medicare; soaring health costs, Social security; demographic realities and so on. But if you need an answer you could google "Social Security disability" and "explosion."
and let me know what in defense you want to cut. because a serious conversation begins there.

chart


chart


35% to 14%. How much more do you prepose we cut?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom