Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/15/2011 8:02:33 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

I hear Huckleberry has taken himself out of the running





Thank God for that.



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/15/2011 10:37:45 PM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Not guilty:)


Course not... but we'd best start looking for Michelle Bachmanesque patterns of speech here on CM. I got a feelin she's been workin the room under multiple accounts

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/15/2011 10:42:47 PM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

I hear Huckleberry has taken himself out of the running


Speaking of candidacy... check out the SNL Fox Debate from last weekend... The Michelle Bachmann piece was completely hysterical:

http://youtu.be/SNoksThSBcY


(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/16/2011 5:41:48 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

Speaking of candidacy... check out the SNL Fox Debate from last weekend... The Michelle Bachmann piece was completely hysterical:

http://youtu.be/SNoksThSBcY



Yeah it was.

I stopped watching SNL because it became boring, but this was hilarious.





< Message edited by rulemylife -- 5/16/2011 5:42:38 AM >

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/16/2011 8:55:33 AM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:


I stopped watching SNL because it became boring, but this was hilarious.


Things have improved in the recent past IMHO... You really wanna piss your pants, go to youtube and query "gaddafi snl" they've got one of the younger guys doing him and even Seth meyers who probably writes the pieces can't keep a straight face.


(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? - 5/16/2011 11:00:24 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Lincoln would weep

Republicans need to stand up for their own best traditions
Monday, May 16, 2011
WASHINGTON -- Republicans are unhappy with their field of presidential candidates and yearn for someone who will come along to save them. But here's what the GOP doesn't want to confront: Its problem lies not in its candidates, but in itself.

The candidates appear much smaller than they are because the party's primary voters and core interest groups insist upon cutting them down to size. To win a Republican nomination, a candidate has to move right, recant absolutely any past position that violates the current conservative catechism and never dare to speak the truth that solving our deficit problem will require new revenues -- aka, taxes.

Thus we have Mitt Romney defending the individual mandate to buy insurance that was part of the health plan he championed in Massachusetts, but then denouncing President Barack Obama for imposing a similar mandate at the national level. This shuffle wasn't good enough for the guardians of conservative orthodoxy. It ruled that Mr. Romney will merit salvation only by fully repudiating his greatest achievement as governor.

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been absolutely abject in declaring his sinfulness for once believing in a cap-and-trade solution to the global warming problem. "I've said I was wrong," he insisted. "It was a mistake, and I'm sorry." Pass him the sackcloth-and-ashes, please.

...........

Even if you accept some pandering to the primary electorate, the Republicans' problem is deeper and it creates huge difficulties for the country as a whole. The reason Washington is paralyzed over the deficit is because most Republicans are petrified to admit that we will never get our budget close to balance without some tax increases. Both Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush raised taxes when deficits got too high. Now, Reagan's party would condemn him as a big-taxing liberal.

In a rational deficit debate, Republicans would call for more spending cuts than Democrats want and also some form of a consumption tax to avoid hikes in levies in income and capital gains. Democrats would insist on fewer cuts and tax increases on income, capital gains and dividends. We'd fight it out, and maybe even find ground for compromise. But as only a few brave Republicans publicly acknowledge, taking all revenues off the table is not a serious position.


........

This goes to the biggest problem of all. Today's Republicans have totally broken with the party's long commitment to innovative national action: the land-grant colleges, national parks, food and drug regulation, interstate highways and government student loans. The creation of the income tax itself was supported by a good conservative Republican president, William Howard Taft.

Today's GOP is committed to one proposition above all others: Reducing the size of the federal government. In this, Republicans resemble no group so much as conservative Democrats from the 1850s -- minus, it must be said quickly and with gratitude, the shameful position such Democrats took on slavery. Even nullification and secession talk is now in vogue among some Republicans.

Imagine what would happen today to a Republican who said this: "Having never been States, either in substance or in name, outside of the Union, whence this magical omnipotence of 'State rights' . ... Much is said about the 'sovereignty' of the States; but the word, even, is not in the national Constitution. ... " Abraham Lincoln spoke those words on July 4, 1861, and believed so much in the national government that he waged a bloody war to save it. Can you imagine any Republican quoting Lincoln on states' rights during the 2012 debates?

What this nation most needs right now is a Republican Party that believes again in its own best traditions. It would be lovely if at least one of the party's presidential candidates stood up for them.



www.post-gazette.com/pg/11136/1146830-109-0.stm#ixzz1MXVjmKTX

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 86
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: So, Who will end up running against Obama? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094