Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 61

Thread: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

  1. #51
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,764

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Foley View Post
    And you neocons won't put oil subsidies on the table. We end up getting the worse of both worlds, thanks.

    You know there's a massive national debt, right?
    Post reported, dont troll.

  2. #52
    Death2Globalists Matt Foley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ExecuteTheTraitors
    Last Seen
    11-24-12 @ 12:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,574

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Post reported, dont troll.
    You do realize one major aspect of neoconnory is deficit spending. The old Conservatives wouldn't have done this.

  3. #53
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Source @: The Maddow Blog - Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    So Republicans really hate handing out money right? The only hand outs they give away are to big business and oil companies, the rest of the American people that just say "**** you" too. Ridiculous...

    Thoughts?
    Comments?
    Response?
    [/FONT][/COLOR]
    Of course they'd protect oil subsidies. That's their buddies there!
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #54
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Post reported, dont troll.
    BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Raising a point is not necessarily trolling, even if you disagree with the point.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #55
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,764

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Raising a point is not necessarily trolling, even if you disagree with the point.
    Originally Posted by Matt Foley
    And you neocons won't put oil subsidies on the table. We end up getting the worse of both worlds, thanks.

    You know there's a massive national debt, right?
    I asked him not to call me by that label. So he did it again. You can make all the points you want, you cant toss labels at people.

    OpportunityCost
    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Originally Posted by Matt Foley
    You know what makes this situation worse? You neocons wouldn't even consider using oil subsidies as a bargaining tool against Green Crap subsidies.
    First off, dont call me a ****ing neocon. Im not.

    Secondly, go back to the post outlined ealier in the thread and put your money where your mouth is and outline your position beyond evil oil companies, yadda yadda. Youre long on rhetoric and short on concrete positions. Go for it, it will be enlightening.

    Third, the current crop of dems dont have the balls to put any subsidies on the table. Nor, I believe, do the current crop of Republicans.
    Ikari I outlined my beliefs on the subsidies, Foley hasnt even made an attempt. Ive suggested twice he do so. This makes the third attempt, Im trying to steer this into a real conversation, hes not. Id welcome your views, go look at posts 26 and 27 and give me your opinions.

  6. #56
    Death2Globalists Matt Foley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ExecuteTheTraitors
    Last Seen
    11-24-12 @ 12:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,574

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    I asked him not to call me by that label. So he did it again. You can make all the points you want, you cant toss labels at people.



    Ikari I outlined my beliefs on the subsidies, Foley hasnt even made an attempt. Ive suggested twice he do so. This makes the third attempt, Im trying to steer this into a real conversation, hes not. Id welcome your views, go look at posts 26 and 27 and give me your opinions.
    Guess you don't like Greek words like NEO which means new, attached to what you already define yourself as "Conservative". See, under your name there it says "Lean: Conservative", and only you can put that in.

    So you're not a NewConservative huh? You certainly aren't a OldConservative, OldConservatives don't recklessly refuse to raise taxes in the face of ginormous budget deficits.

    See the word OldConservative just don't work, sounds like an old fuddy duddy who complains about them youngin's in his rocking chair, that's why we use the terms Paleo and Neo, see.

  7. #57
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,696

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    We also shouldn't encourage people to use those prefixes so recklessly, see. A great deal of the posters do, however.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  8. #58
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,764

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    What's the difference between "conservative" and "neoconservative"? Who are the "neocons," anyway? And were they, as some charge, an unduly influential cabal of intellectuals who talked President Bush into going to war in Iraq after 9/11 as part of their long-planned crusade to plant democracy in the Middle East?
    To seek enlightenment on things neoconservative, I rang up four of the biggest names in the punditry business and asked them the same questions. Rich Lowry is editor of National Review. Paul Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation. Paul Gigot is editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. And George Will is the famous syndicated columnist:

    Q: What is a neoconservative and who are they?

    Rich Lowry: Historically, 30 years ago it meant a former liberal who became a conservative. The cliche was because "they were mugged by reality," but it was because they saw the empirical failures of liberal welfare, state and foreign policies, and they were therefore less ideological than other conservatives and brought much more of a social science background to their argumentation.

    They were associated with Irving Kristol's journal, the Public Interest, that had a lot of social-science pieces poking empirical holes in liberal theory. These people were former liberals, former Democrats, and in some cases former communists, but gradually over 30 years they really merged into the conservative mainstream, and the difference was very difficult to tell.

    In fact, one of the foremost neoconservatives, Norman Podhoretz, wrote an obituary for this distinction several years ago because it just seemed to no longer matter. We've seen the rise of it again, first of all, with John McCain's candidacy in 2000, where the segment of conservatives that supported Sen. McCain tended to have more neo-kind of tendencies and tended to sort of self-consciously describe themselves as "neoconservatives," foremost among them Bill Kristol and David Brooks.

    Neoconservatives are less skeptical of government than other conservatives. They are less worried about reducing the size of government, less enthusiastic about tax cuts, more concerned about forging national crusades that can tap either the American public's patriotism or its desire for reform. You saw this in McCain with his campaign finance proposal and a little bit in his foreign policy.

    And with the war on terror, you saw neoconservatives emerging as a distinct tendency within conservatism, mostly on foreign policy; its hallmarks being extreme interventionism, extremely idealistic foreign policy, and emphasis on democracy building and spreading human rights and freedom and an overestimation, in my view, of how easy it is to spread democracy and liberty to spots in the world where it doesn't exist currently.

    Paul Weyrich: They are mostly ex-liberals, by and large out of the intellectual community. These are people who came to the realization that modern liberalism was not the kind of liberalism that they had subscribed to. They are a fairly small group of people, both in and out of government. Those who are out of government are in either the media or academia. They are influential because they promote each other. They are very skilled at that.

    Paul Gigot: I think of neoconservatism as having a very specific meaning related to history. That is, the neoconservatives were people who in the 1970s were former liberals, in some cases socialists, who moved right in reaction to the left's shift on cultural mores, personal responsibility and foreign policy. So I think the term "neoconservative" has that narrow meaning of that historical period. I think of them as the Podhoretzes and the Kristols and others. I don't think "neoconservative" means much anymore. I don't know what it means now or who they're referring to.

    George Will: Oh gosh, that's not simple. Neoconservatives are persons who in domestic policy often were former Democrats who felt that conservatives had erred in not accepting the post-New Deal role of the central government. They were in their early incarnation focusing on domestic policy and were distinguishing themselves from Goldwater conservatives.

    Also in domestic policies, however, as the '60s unfolded into the '70s and '80s, they led the critique of overreaching in domestic social engineering, saying that we accept the post-New Deal role of the central government, but the accumulated powers thereof are being wielded in a way too confident and optimistic and hubristic, if you will.

    In foreign policy, and here's where it gets interesting, they have a more ambitious, more confident approach to the use of power than regular conservatives -- if you see the symmetry here? They say that America is a nation uniquely equipped as the sole remaining superpower to order the world and spread our values, etc., etc.

    Who are they? The ones most commonly mentioned are Charles Krauthammer, Paul Wolfowitz, maybe Dick Cheney and his aide, Scooter Libby, Doug Feith in the Pentagon, Bill Kristol.

    Q: Is this a neoconservative war in Iraq?

    Rich Lowry: No. We've editorialized about this a couple issues ago. It was a war of national interest, and it was broadly supported on the right for that reason. You had someone like (Rep.) Tom DeLay, who is as conservative as you can get -- he's an unhyphenated conservative through and through -- strongly supporting this. You had all factions of conservatism supporting it, except for a fringe represented by Pat Buchanan, and that's because it was a war of national interest.

    Paul Weyrich: I don't think that you could make that case. Certainly, neoconservatives were pushing for this war. But Vice President Cheney was the principal proponent of the war. He is certainly not a neoconservative. The president himself made the decisions. He's not a neoconservative. There are any number of people in the administration -- Condoleezza Rice, for example -- who were very much in favor of the war but who are not neoconservatives.

    On the other hand, neoconservatives were very involved in the planning and execution of the war -- Paul Wolfowitz being very prominent among them. Conspiratorialists could make the case, I suppose, that it was a neoconservative war. But I think it's much more complex.

    Paul Gigot: No. It's an American war in Iraq. I don't think the Marines who are putting their lives on the line in Fallujah think of themselves as neoconservatives.



    George Will: It had a neoconservative overlay, to the extent that it was a war -- however mistakenly -- based on the confident belief that there was a growing arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq; that was not a distinctly neoconservative rationale.

    Neoconservatives supported the war for that reason, among others. It's the other reasons where it acquired its neoconservative patina. The neoconservative patina is that Iraq should become a secular, pluralist, multiparty, market-oriented democracy with the power of its example to transform the greater Middle East. That's the neoconservative edition.

    Q: Is it automatically anti-Semitic to single out neocons as being the planners and instigators of the war in Iraq?

    Rich Lowry: No. No. It would be false. It wouldn't necessarily be anti-Semitic. It would be accurate to say that some of the most articulate and powerful expressions of the case for war have come from people who are neoconservatives. So that's not anti-Semitic. But if you take a couple of steps beyond that, you begin to get into territory that is a little shady, I would think.

    Paul Weyrich: No. That is really outrageous. I really resent the idea that if you question who it is that planned the war -- just because you ask questions about them -- it is automatically anti-Semitic. It is not. It is legitimate to ask these questions. It is legitimate to have a debate about the legitimacy and effect of this war. If that means questioning some of the people who are involved in it, so be it. The president is a very committed Christian. Should we say that, "Well, we can't question anything that Bush does, because if we did it would be anti-Christian"? That's silly.

    Paul Gigot: No. Unlike a lot of the people on the left, I'm not going to question the motives of people who use the phrase. I think a lot of people just use it as a short-term shortcut for anyone who supported the war. But in the mouth of some people, there is an anti-Semitic overtone. I would point to recent remarks by (Sen.) Fritz Hollings. He clearly was attempting to link support for the war to Jews who also support Israel -- and I think that's a slur.

    George Will: It's not necessarily anti-Semitic. There is often an anti-Semitic twist to it, yes.
    So, what is a 'neocon'? - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

    So. Im going to say again, dont use that tag with me, it does not fit, I do not appreciate it. If you could TRY to address the topic, that would be super, as yet you havent tried very hard.

  9. #59
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Yes i would say 49 out of 53 is a vast majority....
    So Democrats defeated the bill.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  10. #60
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Senate votes to protect oil company subsidies

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    I asked him not to call me by that label. So he did it again. You can make all the points you want, you cant toss labels at people.
    Tell that to Navy Pride.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •